[12.A) A Resolution Determining Site Plan Petition 25-SP1 for a Hotel Comprised of Two Lower Levels of Structural Parking and Six Levels of Hotel Suites/Lodging Units and Hotel Amenities, Including Guest Dining, Fitness Center, Business Center and a Raised Pool, Pool Deck, Courtyard and Patio Space on Lot 2 in The Commons Professional Park Planned Development on Property Owned by Commonage Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, and Located at 870 Goodlette-Frank Road, More Fully Described Herein; and Providing Effective Date.]

MR. DICKMAN. THIS IS THE RESOLUTION, RIGHT? YES. THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL ITEM. THIS IS

[00:50:04]

A RESOLUTION DETERMINING SITE PLAN PETITION 25 SP1 FOR A HOTEL COMPRISED OF TWO LOWER LEVELS OF STRUCTURAL PARKING AND SIX LEVELS OF HOTEL SUITES SLASH LODGING UNITS AND HOTEL AMENITIES, INCLUDING GUEST DINING, FITNESS CENTER, BUSINESS CENTER AND A RAISED POOL DECK. BASED ON LOT TWO IN THE COMMONS PROFESSIONAL PARK. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTY OWNED BY COMMONAGE CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION, AND LOCATED AT 870 GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. FOR ALL THOSE INTENDING TO OFFER TESTIMONY, PLEASE RISE. RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? YES. THANK YOU. AND WITH THAT COUNCIL DISCLOSURES, COUNCIL MEMBER KRULL. I KNOW WHERE THE SITE HAVEN'T MET WITH ANY OWNERS MANAGER. COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE, MET WITH PETITIONER AND PETITIONER'S AGENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF GAINING CLARITY ON THE PROJECT, AND KRAMER, FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE, MET WITH STAFF AND PETITIONER'S AGENT. SAME WITH FOR THE PURPOSE OF SORTING IT OUT, COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. COUNCIL MEMBER YEAH, FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. MET WITH THE PETITIONER'S AGENT. THAT'S IT, VICE MAYOR. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE, I VISITED IT, I TALKED WITH OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR ABOUT THIS PETITION AND OUR CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT THIS PETITION, AND MET WITH MISS PASSIDOMO LAST WEEK ABOUT THE PETITION WHERE SHE JUST WALKED ME THROUGH THE PROPOSAL AND ANSWERED A FEW QUESTIONS THAT I HAD. AND I THINK THOSE ANSWERS WILL COME UP IN TODAY'S SESSION. IF NOT, I'LL MAKE SURE THEY DO. JUST SO ALL THE INFORMATION THAT I HAD IS PUBLIC. THANKS. THANK YOU. I MET WITH THE PETITIONER AND THE PETITIONER'S AGENT THE FIRST TIME AFTER THEIR DRB PRESENTATION. UNFORTUNATELY NOT WITH THE UPDATED INFORMATION, BUT I HAVE REVIEWED ALL OF THE UPDATED INFORMATION. I MET WITH STAFF AND THAT'S MY DISCLOSURES.

SO WELCOME, MISS PASSIDOMO. GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, FRANCESCA PASSIDOMO COLEMAN, YOVANOVITCH AND KESTER. FOR THE RECORD HERE ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER. A M HOTEL NAPLES OWNER, THE CREATOR OF THIS PROJECT THAT WILL BE SHOWING TO YOU TODAY WITH ME IS THE PROJECT DESIGN TEAM AND THE ENGINEERING TEAM THAT WILL WALK YOU THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THE THE SITE PLAN, DESIGN ELEMENTS. MARK MCCLAIN, THE SENIOR PROJECT MANAGER AND NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF THE COMMERCIAL DIVISION OF MH, EXCUSE ME, OF MH K ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING.

CHRISTIAN ANDREA, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND PRINCIPAL WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND DESIGN.

ANDREW ROTH, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER AND VICE PRESIDENT OF DAVIDSON ENGINEERING. NORM TREBILCOCK, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER AND PRESIDENT OF ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS. AND CHRIS CLAUSSEN, A TEAM MEMBER WITH THE AAM NAPLES HOTEL OWNER. WE WILL PROCEED IN IN THE ORDER I JUST DEVELOPED. MR. CLAUSSEN IS HERE JUST TO ANSWER ANY OPERATIONAL QUESTIONS. IF THOSE COME COME ABOUT IN THE COURSE OF THIS PRESENTATION. THIS IS AS NOTED IN THE TITLE. THIS IS A SITE PLAN PETITION FOR A 290 UNIT HOTEL WITH ON SITE PARKING, LANDSCAPING, A LINEAR PARK AND PATHWAY AND AMENITIES INTERIOR TO THE HOTEL, INCLUDING AN INTERNAL COURTYARD, POOL, FITNESS ROOM AND HOTEL. EXCLUSIVE DINING AS WE WILL SHOW, THE PARAMETERS OF THE SITE PLAN REQUIRE NO VARIANCES OR DEVIATIONS. THIS IMAGE ON THE SCREEN DEPICTS THE CLASS OF DESIGN THAT WILL BE A THEME THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE PRESENTATION. THE COMMONS, THE PROJECT LOCATION. THE PROPERTY IS BORDERED IN RED ON YOUR SCREEN AND IT SOUNDS THAT YOU'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE THE SITE. IT IS ON THE EAST SIDE OF A DIVIDED HIGHWAY.

GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD BETWEEN THE MEDICAL OFFICE COMPLEX KNOWN AS COLONIAL SQUARE TO THE NORTH AND THE RADIOLOGY REGIONAL CENTER TO THE SOUTH. THE HOTEL IS PART OF A LONG

[00:55:08]

TERM MIXED USE PLANNING PROJECT KNOWN AS THE COMMONS. THE COMMONS IS IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA. THE COMMON STEMS FROM AS. AS YOU ALL MAY BE FAMILIAR FROM. THE MATERIALS IN YOUR AGENDA PACKET STEMS FROM A UNIQUE PROCEDURAL HISTORY THAT. WITH YOUR INDULGENCE, I WILL PROVIDE TO YOU AS A HISTORICAL CONTEXT FOR THE SITE PLAN PETITION BEFORE YOU TODAY. MADAM MAYOR, IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO MY PROCEEDING THROUGH THAT HISTORICAL CONTEXT? OKAY, GOOD. THANK YOU. A 1980 THE COMMONS WAS APPROVED BY COLLIER COUNTY AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT. SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENTS WERE MADE BY VIRTUE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT, INCLUDING THE SIGNALIZATION AT SEVENTH AVENUE NORTH AND GOODLIFFE FRANK ROAD, THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT AND COULD AUTHORIZE MULTIPLE PERMITTED USES, INCLUDING OFFICE, HOTEL, RETAIL USES AND RESIDENTIAL USES IN A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. IN 1989, THE CITY OF NAPLES ANNEXED THE COMMONS INTO ITS MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY AND CONCURRENTLY ENTERED INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FROM 1990 1989 AS WELL, FORMS THE PREDICATE FOR THE ANNEXATION. RECITING THAT, AND I QUOTE, THE CITY ACKNOWLEDGES DEVELOPMENT AUTHORIZED BY THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT AND THE INCORPORATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IS A PERMITTED DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE COMMONS.

THE CITY AGREED TO, AND I AGAIN, QUOTE, ADOPT A NEW DEVELOPMENT ORDER THAT INCORPORATES ALL RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS ESTABLISHED IN THE 1980 DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT AND INCORPORATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS WHICH IS TIED TO FLORIDA STATUTES AND THE OBLIGATION TO DO SO. WHEN A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT IS ANNEXED. IN 2017, THE CITY DID JUST THAT AND ULTIMATELY RATIFIED THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT AND THE INCORPORATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THE COMMERCIAL SQUARE FEET ENTITLEMENTS AND RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT ENTITLEMENTS UNDER THE DRY ARE REFLECTED ON THE SCREEN. THESE VALUES SIMPLY CAPTURE THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT PARAMETERS RECOGNIZED BY THE CITY FOR ANNEXATION IN 1989 AS PART OF THE 2017 RESOLUTION, THE CITY ALSO ADOPTED AND IMPOSED A PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS FOR THE COMMONS UPON RECOMMENDATION BY STATE AND REGIONAL PLANNING AGENCIES, THE TRIP CAP WAS AN ADDITIONAL THREAT THRESHOLD METRIC REQUIRED BY THE CITY FOR THE MATRIX OF USES IN THE COMMONS. THE TRIP WAS NOT PART OF THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL, BUT IT WAS AN ADDITIONAL IMPOSITION IMPOSED BY THE CITY AND ACCEPTED BY THE OWNER AT THAT TIME. THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT CREATES A MASTER PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT REFERRED TO AS MAP H. MAP H HAS REMAINED UNCHANGED SINCE 1980.

THERE IS A SINGLE ACCESS POINT TO THE COMMONS, WHICH LOOPS AROUND AN INTERNAL LAKE AND SETS ASIDE PRESERVED LANDS CONTIGUOUS TO GORDON RIVER. MAP H ALSO DEMONSTRATES PROXIMITY TO BUS STOPS ON 10TH AVENUE NORTH AND SEVENTH AVENUE NORTH, WHICH REMAIN TODAY. MOST OF THE PARCELS ARE BUILT FOR DEVELOPMENT, WITH ONLY TRACK THREE AND TRACK TEN REMAINING.

FOR FULL DEVELOPMENT. WE SHOW THE ENTITLEMENT ALLOCATIONS ON THE SCREEN. THE HOTEL IS PLANNED FOR TRACK TWO, WHERE THE STAR HAS BEEN PLACED. VISITING THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN THE COMMONS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WAS APPROVED IN 1980. CONTEMPORANEOUSLY, WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT, IT REFLECTS THE DEVELOPMENT USES AND STANDARDS FOR THE COMMONS. THE COMMONS INCLUDES A VARIETY OF USES, AS PREVIOUSLY NOTED, INCLUDING HOTEL, PROFESSIONAL, MEDICAL, OFFICE, RETAIL AND RESIDENTIAL THAT INTEGRATE HARMONIOUSLY IN AN INHERENTLY COHERENT MANNER UNDER THE CATEGORY OF PROFESSIONAL OFFICE, HOTEL IS EXPRESSLY PERMITTED AND A CONTEMPLATED USE WITH APPROVAL OF THE HOTEL. APPROXIMATELY 300,000FT■!S OF PROFESSIONAL OFFICE USE WILL REMAIN SUBJECT TO THE TRIP CAP ADOPTED BY THE CITY IN 2017. THE PUD ESTABLISHES CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR THE COMMONS. MR. MCLEAN WILL DEMONSTRATE SITE

[01:00:01]

PLANNING CONSISTENT WITH THESE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. YOU WILL SEE THAT PARKING IS ACCOMMODATED WITHIN THE BUILDING THROUGH HIS PRESENTATION, AS SHOWN IN THE COMMONS SITE. ELEVATION. THIS ALLOWS FOR A REDUCTION IN SURFACE LEVEL PARKING AND AS MR. ANDRÉEA WILL SHOW THROUGH HIS PRESENTATION, AN OPENING FOR LINEAR PARK AND GREEN SPACE FRONTING GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. AS HIGHLIGHTED ON YOUR SCREEN, THE 1980 PUD OUTLINES THE PROCESS FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL. THE PUD PREDATES THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS ACTIVATED, ACTIVATED BY THE CITY OF NAPLES IN 2008. THE IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION BEFORE YOU TODAY IS TO DEMONSTRATE THE HOTEL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SITE PLAN CRITERIA, WHICH OUR EXPERTS WILL TESTIFY AS THE CASE AND AS SUPPORTED BY YOUR EXPERT STAFF IN THEIR SITE PLAN SUFFICIENCY LETTER AND STAFF REPORT. FOR THAT REASON, WE ELECTED TO PRESENT THE SITE PLAN TO YOU TODAY IN A COMMITMENT TO OPENNESS AND INFORMATION SHARING. IN 2000, THE CITY ADOPTED THE CHARTER AMENDMENT IN AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION. AT THAT TIME, THE COMMENTS ASKED THE CIRCUIT COURT TO CONFIRM THAT THE RIGHTS UNDER THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WERE NOT IMPACTED. THE COURT DETERMINED, BASED ON MULTIPLE LEGAL PRECEDENTS, INCLUDING THE THEORY OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL, THAT THE COMMONS PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS, INCLUDING HEIGHT, ARE VESTED. THE DETERMINATION WAS UPHELD ON APPEAL. WE SPENT TIME WALKING THROUGH THE HISTORY AND ENTITLEMENTS TO FRAME THE PRINCIPLES THAT WERE COMPREHENSIVELY ADOPTED, ACKNOWLEDGED AND RATIFIED BY THE CITY AND FURTHER CONFIRMED BY THE CIRCUIT COURT OVER THE COURSE OF DECADES. AS AN INTRODUCTION TO THE SITE PLAN PRESENTATION. AS I TRANSITIONED TO THE SITE PLAN ITSELF, WHICH THE EXPERTS WILL WALK THROUGH IN DETAIL, I WANTED TO REORIENT YOU TO THE BUILT CONTEXT, INCLUDING SURROUNDING USES, ACCESS, AND MATURE VEGETATION. IN SHORT, THE SITE PLAN WAS CAREFULLY DESIGNED. ACCESS IS INTERNAL FROM THE COMMONS GOODLETTE ROAD ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF YOUR SCREEN IS NOT GOOD AT FRANK ROAD. THAT IS THE INTERNAL LOOP ROAD TO THE COMMONS. IT MAY BE CHANGED TO SEVENTH AVENUE NORTH. WE'RE NOT IN CHARGE OF THE THE NAMING OF THE STREETS, BUT WE HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THAT TO THAT MODIFICATION. I WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE LEFT SIDE OF THE SCREEN IS WEST FACING GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. ACCESS AGAIN IS INTERNAL FROM THE COMMONS, GUIDING TRAFFIC THROUGH A PERVIOUS PAVER SYSTEM TO THE PORTICO ENTRY. MR. ANDREA WILL EXPLAIN TO YOU THE. THE PERVIOUS PAVER SYSTEM AND MR. ROTH WILL EXPLAIN THAT WE EXCEED STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS. HOTEL, OUTDOOR AMENITIES AND REFUSE COLLECTION FACED EAST INTERNAL TO THE COMMONS. THE HOTEL IS INTERCONNECTED TO A PLANNED MEANDERING INTERNAL PATHWAY AND EXTERNAL SIDEWALK SYSTEM. THROUGH THIS WAS THROUGH WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORS AS WELL AS STAFF. MR. ANDRE WILL EXPLAIN THIS IN GREATER DETAIL, BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS A NETWORK FROM THE ENTRY TO THE SIDEWALK SYSTEM THAT WE WERE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE BY MAKING SOME ADJUSTMENTS, REMOVING A A RESTAURANT FEATURE FROM THE ROOFTOP, WHICH REDUCED PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND PROVIDED FOR THIS GREEN SPACE. AS A JOGGER MYSELF, THIS. THIS TO ME IS THE BEST OF NAPLES. IT IS. IT WILL TIE INTO THE GREENWAY. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE SHOULD ALL LOOK TO AS A REALLY EMBLEMATIC PROJECT AND, AND PARTICIPATION OF OF NEIGHBORHOOD INVOLVEMENT. THE SITE DESIGN IS A RESULT, AGAIN, OF COLLABORATION WITH RESIDENTS ACROSS FRANK ROAD, AS WELL AS RECOMMENDATIONS BY STAFF AND THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. THE STAFF REPORT DETAILS HOW THE SITE DESIGN HAS EVOLVED WITH COMMUNITY INPUT. FINALLY, WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS AS OUTLINED IN THE STAFF REPORT. HAVING LAID THE FOUNDATION. UNLESS THERE ARE INITIAL QUESTIONS, MR. MCLEAN WILL NOW GUIDE YOU THROUGH THE BUILDING AND ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS OF THE PROJECT. MARK. GOOD MORNING FOR THE RECORD. MARK MCLEAN MHK ARCHITECTURE, 205 9:10 A.M.

EAST. JUST KIND OF RUN THROUGH THE PLANS. FRANCESCA TOUCHED ON A LOT OF THINGS. SO I DON'T

[01:05:04]

WANT TO BE REPETITIVE, BUT WE CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

BUT WE DO HAVE A 290 UNIT TRANSIENT LODGING UNIT HOTEL OVER TWO FLOORS OF PARKING.

WE'VE GOT A THIRD FLOOR AMENITY LEVEL THAT I'LL TOUCH ON BRIEFLY AS WE GO THROUGH THE, THE THE PLANS HERE AND FOUR STOREYS OF FIVE STOREYS OF HOTEL UNITS ABOVE THAT. SO AS FRANCESCA WAS EXPLAINING, THE ENTRANCE INTO OUR HOTEL IS ON THE EAST SIDE. THAT'S ALSO BACK OF HOUSE WHEN SHE WAS ZOOMED IN ON THIS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE PARCEL FACES GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD, SO WE WANTED THAT TO BE THE FACE OF OUR BUILDING. SO PEOPLE TRAVELING UP AND DOWN GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD, LOOK AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, A GOOD LOOKING BUILDING INSTEAD OF A BACK OF HOUSE. BUT AS YOU COME THROUGH THE INNER LOOP, WE'RE GOING TO BE BRINGING PEOPLE INTO OUR HOTEL THROUGH THE BACK OF HOUSE. SO I'LL POINT OUT HOW WE MANAGE THAT, HOW WE WORK THROUGH THAT. AS WE CAME IN, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT CAME UP AS WE WERE DISCOVERING THIS WAS THAT WE DID PUT ALL OF BACK OF HOUSE. LET ME SEE. MY POINTER IS HERE. WE PUT ALL OF BACK OF HOUSE BACK HERE, BUT WE'VE PROTECTED IT SINCE OUR, OUR, OUR GUESTS WILL BE COMING UP THIS WAY AND TURNING IN. THAT HELPED US CHANGE THIS DRIVE OUT INTO A PAVER DRIVE OUT THAT WILL ALLOW GUESTS TO COME IN AND EASILY BE ABLE TO FIND THEIR WAY TO THE FRONT OF THE HOTEL. A FEW THINGS TO POINT OUT ON THE SITE PLAN IS HOW DO SETBACKS WORK? A LOT OF PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S THE CLEAR VIEW BETWEEN BUILDINGS AND HOW IS THIS SET UP? IT'S ALL MANAGED BY YOUR CODE. SO THE WAY THE CODE WORKS WITHIN THE COMMONS IS WE TAKE OUR BUILDING HEIGHT PLUS THE BUILDING HEIGHT OF THE NEIGHBORING BUILDING, AND WE DIVIDE IT BY TWO. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE WE TOOK OUR BUILDING HEIGHT, THEIR BUILDING HEIGHT DIVIDED BY TWO, AND WE GOT A 60 FOOT SETBACK. SO THE 60 FOOT SETBACK IS FROM THIS LINE TO THIS LINE. AND AS YOU CAN SEE WE TREMENDOUSLY EXCEED THAT. SO THE DAYLIGHT BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS WILL BE MUCH GREATER THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED BY LAW OR BY CODE. THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS ON A 250 FOOT SETBACK. THE WAY IT WORKS IN THE COMMONS IS FOR EVERY FLOOR YOU ADD TO YOUR BUILDING, YOU HAVE TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL 25 FOOT OF SETBACK. SO WE HAVE AN ORIGINAL 50 FOOT SETBACK. AND THEN AS WE ADDED FLOORS TO THE BUILDING, WE HAD TO COME BACK ANOTHER 25FT. SO ULTIMATELY FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE, OUR BUILDING IS 225FT FROM OUR PROPERTY LINE. OUR PROPERTY LINE IS ANOTHER 25FT FROM THE EDGE OF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD.

GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD IS ALMOST 80FT WIDE. AND THEN THE ADJACENT HOUSE THAT'S ACROSS FROM US IS STILL ANOTHER 50FT FROM THERE. SO FROM THE FACE OF OUR BUILDING TO THE FACE OF THE NEAREST HOUSE IS 420FT. FROM BUILDING TO BUILDING. THIS AGAIN GOES INTO ALL OF THE METRICS ON HOW THE BUILDING SETBACKS WORK. THE HEIGHT OF THIS BUILDING IS TRULY UNIQUE IN THE CITY OF NAPLES, WHERE IT'S GOVERNED BY THE FLOOR TO FLOOR HEIGHT. WE COULD MAKE THE FLOOR TO FLOOR HEIGHT ANY HEIGHT WE WANTED IT TO BE, AND MAKE OUR BUILDING AS TALL AS WE WANTED IT TO BE, BUT THEN WE WOULD HAVE A LOT COVERAGE ISSUE. SO IN CONJUNCTION WITH LOT COVERAGE, THE TALLER OUR BUILDING GETS, THE LESS LOT COVERAGE WE GET. SO WE HAD TO CONTROL THAT BY CONTROLLING THE FLOOR TO FLOOR HEIGHT, WHICH CONTROLLED THE LOT COVERAGE, WHICH WORKS ALL IN THE MATRIX, WHICH WAS REVIEWED BY YOUR STAFF AND MEETS ALL OF THE CODE.

SO THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO OUR BUILDING HEIGHT. THAT'S HOW WE GOT TO OUR OUR SETBACKS. AND THAT'S HOW WE MEET OUR LOT COVERAGE STANDARDS. AS YOU MOVE UP THROUGH THE BUILDING, THE SECOND FLOOR IS AGAIN A PARKING GARAGE. COMING UP TO THE THIRD FLOOR IS THE MAIN AMENITY LEVEL.

THIS IS WHERE THE LAUNDRY IS. THE KITCHEN IS THE RESTAURANT FOR THE HOTEL, THE RESTROOMS, THE GAME ROOM, THE LOBBY CHECK IN AREA, THE CONFERENCE CENTER, THE FITNESS CENTER, AND ALL OF THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. LAUNDRY. THERE'S AN INTERIOR COURTYARD THAT WE'VE GOT SOME IMAGERY OF THAT. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT. AND THEN THERE'S A PATHWAY THROUGH THAT INTERIOR COURTYARD DOWN TO THE POOL, WHICH ISN'T FLUSH WITH THE THIRD FLOOR. IT'S ABOUT A HALF STORY DOWN TO JUST GIVE IT A LITTLE BIT OF DEFINITION, A LITTLE BIT OF ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER AS WE MOVE UP INTO THE BUILDING, THE THE FOURTH THROUGH SEVENTH FLOOR ARE OUR ROOMS, THE EIGHTH FLOORS, ROOMS. WE BROKE IT OUT BECAUSE THE CEILING HEIGHT IS A LITTLE HIGHER ON THAT TO HELP THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE BUILDING UP ONTO THE ROOF PLAN. EVERYTHING IS FULLY SCREENED AS REQUIRED BY CODE. HERE'S A BUILDING SECTION ILLUSTRATING THAT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. THE FIRST 50 FOOT AND THEN 25FT PER FLOOR OF ELEVATION. AND THEN YOU CAN SEE THAT'S HOW WE DERIVED OUR EIGHT STORY BUILDING, BUILDING ELEVATIONS THERE HERE FOR THE TECHNICALITY PORTION OF THE SITE PLAN REVIEW TO CONFIRM THAT WE'VE MET WITH ALL OF THE REQUIRED STANDARDS. THEY'RE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKAGE BECAUSE THEY'RE PART OF THE SITE PLAN PACKAGE. BUT WE'LL GET TO THE RENDERINGS SO WE CAN SHOW YOU WHAT THE BUILDING LOOKS LIKE. SO THIS IS THE THE IMAGERY FROM THE FRONT OF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. AND WE ALSO HAVE AN IMAGE FROM THE ROAD. BUT I WANTED TO START HERE JUST TO SHOW YOU THE BEAUTY OF THE BUILDING, THE SYMMETRY OF THE BUILDING, THE SIMPLICITY OF THE BUILDING TO JUST LET IT REALLY FIT IN WITH THE ADJACENT ARCHITECTURE THAT'S IN THE COMMONS RIGHT NOW AS WE COME AROUND AND GET THOSE, THAT PRIMARY WALKWAY AND TREES OUT OF THE WAY A LITTLE BIT, WE CAN SEE THE THE STOREFRONT WINDOWS THAT ARE IN THE FRONT OF THE TOWER ELEMENT THAT REALLY OPEN UP THE LOBBY SO THAT WHEN YOU COME IN AND YOU COME UP THE ELEVATOR AND ARRIVE IN THE LOBBY, IT'S A WELL LIT, WELL RECEIVED LOBBY. THE GARAGE IS ON, THE FIRST TWO FLOORS ARE COMPLETELY SCREENED SO THAT NO HEADLIGHTS WILL BE SHINING OUT OF THE BUILDING WHEN CARS ARE

[01:10:04]

PARKING IN THERE AT NIGHT TIME. SO IT'S ALL WELL CONTROLLED WITH WITH SHADOW BOXES MOVING AROUND TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING, YOU CAN SEE THIS IS THE ACCESS RAMP BACK HERE UP TO THE SECOND FLOOR PARKING GARAGE. YOU'D COME AROUND, PULL IN, AND DRIVE UP TO THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE PARKING GARAGE. YOU CAN SEE HOW WE'VE GROWN VINE UP THE SIDE OF IT. WE'VE PLANTED PALMS AND OTHER TREES HERE TO COMPLETELY SCREEN THAT, SO THERE'S NOT JUST A RAMP SITTING ON THE SIDE OF A BUILDING. WE'VE COMPLETELY MASKED IT BEHIND A WALL AND THEN HID THAT WALL IN LANDSCAPING. THIS KIND OF BRINGS US AROUND TO THE EAST SIDE. THIS IS OUR BACK OF HOUSE.

THIS WALL IS WAS DESIGNED TO BE THIS HIGH, THAT IF THERE IS A SEMI IN THERE MAKING DELIVERIES TO THE KITCHEN, THAT IT'S COMPLETELY SCREENED, THAT IF OUR GUESTS ARE PULLING IN, OUR GUESTS WOULD COME, COME AROUND THIS WAY THEY WOULD PULL IN AND THAT WOULD BE COMPLETELY SCREENED FROM THE STREET THERE. OUR SIGNAGE, OUR ARRIVAL SIGNAGE AND THE PAVERS BRING A CLIENT OR A GUEST RIGHT AROUND TO THE FRONT OF THE HOTEL WHILE COMPLETELY SCREENING AND MASKING THAT. AS FAR AS KEEPING ALL OF THAT CLEAN AND UNDER CONTROL, THE SECOND WALL THAT'S BACK HERE IS THE RETAINING WALL FOR THE POOL. SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE OUR BACK OF HOUSE DIRTY. IT'S THE IT'S THE ARRIVAL POINT OF OUR GUESTS AND IT'S ALSO SCREENING OUR POOL.

SO THAT'S GOING TO BE A CLEAN, WELL MAINTAINED AREA WITHIN THE COMMONS. AN AERIAL SHOWING THE OVERALL VIEW OF THE PROPERTY AND HOW IT FITS AND SITS WITHIN THE SITE, SHOWING THE LINEAR PARK ALONG THE FRONT THAT FRANCESCA MADE REFERENCE TO HOW THE THE THE PAVERS WORK WITHIN THE SYSTEM HERE. AND CHRISTIAN WILL GET MORE INTO HOW EXACTLY THAT WORKS AS WE MOVE AROUND TO THE NORTH SIDE. LOOKING BACK TOWARDS IT, YOU CAN SEE AGAIN THERE'S THE RAMP THAT TAKES YOU INTO THE SECOND FLOOR OF THE PARKING GARAGE, THE MAIN ENTRANCE INTO THE GROUND FLOOR PARKING GARAGE, AND THEN FOR THE FIRST TIME, YOU SEE THE POOL. IT'S ON THE EAST SIDE AND OUR BACK OF HOUSE BACK HERE COMING AROUND TO LOOK DIRECTLY OVER THE POOL AMENITY. YOU CAN SEE THAT IF THERE'S GUESTS OUT ON THE POOL AMENITY, THERE IS AN EMERGENCY EGRESS ACCESS HERE THAT GETS SOMEONE OFF OF THE POOL DECK IN AN EMERGENCY. WE'VE WORKED THROUGH ALL OF THAT THROUGH LIFE SAFETY WITH THE THE SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL OF THE LIFE SAFETY. AND WE STILL HAVE TO NAVIGATE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT PROCESS OF GETTING OUR BUILDING PERMIT. IF WE GAIN YOUR APPROVAL TODAY UP INTO THE COURTYARD, IF A IF THERE'S SOME ENTERTAINING SPACES HERE, WE'VE PUT SOME FAUX TURF IN FOR SOME GAMES AND A AND A SMALL OUTDOOR GATHERING AREA WITH SOME FIRE PITS AND JUST SOME ENTERTAINMENT AREA FOR OUR GUESTS AT THE HOTEL.

AND JUST ANOTHER IMAGE OF THE POOL DECK ITSELF. THIS IS ON THE SIDEWALK ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. LOOKING BACK, LIKE I MENTIONED, THIS IS NEARLY THIS WOULD PROBABLY BE ABOUT 375FT FROM THE HOTEL. THERE'S A RESIDENTIAL HOUSE DIRECTLY BEHIND US, BUT THIS IS WITH THE THE MATURE TREES THAT ARE HERE. NOW, THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, GRAPHICALLY REPRESENTATIONS OF THE MATURE TREES THAT ARE THERE. BUT WE'RE LEAVING ALL THE EXISTING MATURE TREES THAT ARE ALONG. GOODLETTE. FRANK. WE'RE LEAVING THEM INTACT. WE'RE NOT BUILDING CLOSE ENOUGH TO THEM THAT WE WILL HARM ANY OF THOSE TREES. THESE PLANS ARE SPECIFIC LIGHTING PLANS THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR DRB. SO WE'VE LEFT THEM IN THE PACKAGE JUST TO SHOW OUR PACKAGE COMPLETE AND HOW WE'RE GOING TO MANAGE THAT LIGHTING AND THE TYPE OF LIGHTING THAT WILL BE WITHIN THIS. AND THIS IS THE COLOR PALETTE IN THE FINISHED PALETTE THAT'S REQUIRED FOR DRB. WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER TO CHRISTIAN AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. GOOD MORNING CHRISTIAN ANDREA, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WITH ARCHITECTURAL AND DESIGN. THIS IS EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS THE PERIMETER. ANYTHING THAT'S PAINTED IN GREEN HERE REPRESENTS TREES THAT WE'RE KEEPING. THERE ARE MATURE MAHOGANY TREES ACROSS THE WEST SIDE THAT WE THINK ADD A LOT OF VALUE TO THE PROPERTY THAT WE'RE PART OF THE CONVERSATION. THE STREET TREE CODE REQUIRES A DIFFERENT PLANT SPECIES THERE, AND WE'RE IN DISCUSSIONS AND ARE WORKING WITH STAFF TO GET CONFIRMATION THAT IT'S OKAY TO KEEP THOSE EXISTING TREES, BECAUSE THEY ADD A LOT MORE VALUE THAN ADDING NEW VARIETY OF TREES THERE. THE INTERNAL SITE AREA. THESE ARE A HANDFUL OF MISCELLANEOUS TREES, CABBAGE PALMS, AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT ARE PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED. THIS IS THE SAME EXHIBIT WITH AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH UNDERNEATH, SO YOU CAN SEE IT IN CONTEXT. THIS IS THE OVERALL SITE PLAN JUST RUNNING AROUND THE SITE. THESE ARE LARGE OAK TREES ACROSS THE NORTH BOUNDARY. HERE AGAIN THE MAHOGANY TREES ACROSS THE WEST SIDE. EVERYTHING IN GREEN IS LANDSCAPE RELATED PAVEMENT. WE HAVE PERMEABLE PAVERS THAT ARE ON THE WEST AND SOUTH SIDE. THIS ASSISTS IN WATER MANAGEMENT AND ALSO PROVIDES AN ENHANCED LOOK AND EXPERIENCE TO THE PROPERTY.

WITH A SIDEWALK THAT IS ON AXIS WITH THE FRONT DOOR THAT CONNECTS TO THE GOODLETTE FRANK SIDEWALK. AND THEN INTERNAL TO THAT, WE HAVE KIND OF A LITTLE LINEAR PARK HERE EXPERIENCE WITH A SIDEWALK THAT MEANDERS THROUGH THE SITE WHILE STILL CONNECTING IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS. THERE'S A SMALL WATER MANAGEMENT AREA HERE AND A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF GREEN SPACE THAT ADDS TO THAT LINEAR PARK EXPERIENCE. SOUTHEAST CORNER IS OUR MAIN ENTRY. THIS IS A WATER FEATURE SIGNAGE ELEMENT. SOMETHING UNIQUE THAT WE'RE TRYING. HERE IS SOME POTS THAT ARE ELEVATED ON LITTLE PIERS THAT CREATE A NEAT ARCHITECTURAL EXPERIENCE ALONG GOODLETTE ROAD. HERE TO THE SIDE, A SIDEWALK LINKAGE THAT WRAPS AROUND THE PROPERTY HERE.

AND AGAIN, ANOTHER PAVER EXPERIENCE ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER. THE NORTHERN EAST CORNER. HERE IS SOME PARALLEL PARKING THAT IS ON A PERMEABLE TURF PARKING. SO IT PROVIDES A

[01:15:06]

LITTLE BIT OF A LANDSCAPE LOOK, YET STILL PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL PARKING. I THINK THAT'S GOOD FOR OH, THERE'S A SIGN ELEMENT THAT IS RIGHT IN THIS LOCATION HERE. AND NOW.

THESE ARE ENLARGEMENTS OF EACH OF THESE QUADRANTS. I'LL JUST RUN THROUGH THESE QUICKLY.

THEY'RE MAINLY HERE IN CASE WE NEED TO COME BACK AND LOOK AT ANYTHING IN DETAIL. SO THAT'S THE NORTHWEST CORNER. YOU CAN SEE THE SIDEWALK THAT WRAPS THE PROPERTY HERE. AND THEN AGAIN THE ENHANCED PAVEMENT PERMEABLE PAVERS FOR THE MOTOR COURT NORTHEAST CORNER. SAME THING.

ENTRY FEATURE CONTINUATION OF THAT SIDEWALK. SOUTHWEST CORNER. YOU SEE MORE OF THE LINEAR PARK WALKWAY WITH SOME BENCH OPPORTUNITIES THROUGHOUT. AND THEN THE ENHANCED PAVEMENT AND SOUTHEAST CORNER. THE ENLARGEMENT OF THE WATER FEATURE AND SIGNAGE ELEMENT.

THIS IS AN ENLARGEMENT OF THE POOL DECK AREA. THE BROWN AREAS HERE ARE ARE MULCH, SO I SHOULD HAVE PAINTED THEM GREEN TO MAKE IT A LITTLE EASIER TO READ, BUT WE'RE DOING SOME DECORATIVE PAVEMENT THROUGHOUT THE COURTYARD AND POOL EXPERIENCE. IT'S A LAGOON STYLE POOL. THE COURTYARD AS WELL HAS GOT A FAIR BIT OF LANDSCAPE OPPORTUNITIES. WATER FEATURE FOR SOME WHITE NOISE. THIS IS AN ENLARGEMENT OF THAT. THE ARTIFICIAL TURF THAT MARK TOUCHED ON DURING HIS PRESENTATION, AND A MORE INTERESTING PAVING PATTERN WITHIN THAT COURTYARD POOL DECK ALSO ENHANCED PAVING OPPORTUNITIES, A RAMP ACCESS THAT BRINGS PEOPLE FROM UP FROM THE UPPER DECK HERE DOWN TO THIS KIND OF MEZZANINE POOL AREA. THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. AGAIN, STARTING WITH THE MAHOGANY TREES, YOU CAN SEE THE LARGE CANOPY THAT EXISTS THAT PROVIDES A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL BUFFER. WE'RE ACTUALLY SHOWING FOUR ROWS OF PLANTING HERE, WHICH IS A LITTLE UNUSUAL. NORMALLY WE WOULDN'T HAVE THAT MUCH PLANTING WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE AS DENSE OF A BUFFER HERE TO SHIELD ANY LIGHTS OR ANYTHING SHINING TO THE WEST. THESE PLANTS AT INSTALLATION ARE FOUR FEET TALL. WE ENVISION THEM BEING MAINTAINED AROUND FIVE FEET AGAIN. SO WE HAVE TWO LAYERS OF THAT TALL HEDGE. AND THEN IN FRONT OF THAT, THE WEST SIDE OF THAT ARE LAYERS OF SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS TO HELP SCALE IT DOWN AND HELP ADD TO THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE ALONG GOODLETTE INTERNAL TO THAT, THAT LINEAR PARK EXPERIENCE, WE'VE ADDED A LOT OF GRASSES AROUND THE BANKS OF THAT DETENTION MANAGEMENT AREA, WATER MANAGEMENT AREA, AND THEN A HANDFUL OF TREES AND CANOPY JUST TO HELP AID AND PROVIDE A LITTLE SHADE AND SOME OPEN LAWN AREAS AS WELL THAT ALLOW PEOPLE TO PLAY A LITTLE MORE FREE SPACE. THE MAIN ACCESS INTO THE SITE IS A BOULEVARD OF SPECIMEN PALM TREES. THESE ARE DATE PALMS THAT ARE FREQUENTLY USED. THE PARKING LOT ISLANDS ARE OAK TREES, AND THEN WE'VE INCORPORATED SOME MORE NATIVE TREES HERE. THESE ARE GUMBO LIMBOS, SO PROVIDES A LITTLE BIT OF A FLORIDA CHARM. AND THEN THE YELLOW TREES HERE REPRESENT SOME FLOWERING TREES. IT'S CALLED VERA WOOD. AND ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY AGAIN THE GUMBO LIMBOS IN THIS LOCATION FOR THE ISLANDS. AND THEN GREEN BUTTONWOOD TREES IS OUR PRIMARY BUFFER THAT WE INFILL ALONG THE SOUTH AND ALSO THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT. NOW I'LL GO INTO AGAIN, THESE ARE JUST ENLARGEMENTS OF THOSE SAME SPACES. SO WE CAN COME BACK TO IN DETAIL. WE HAVE SOME MORE VERTICAL ELEMENTS HERE. THESE ARE COCONUT PALMS AS THE CORNERS OF THE BUILDING, AND THEN SOME ROYAL PALMS HERE FOR SOME VERTICAL HEIGHT. AND AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE ABUNDANCE OF LANDSCAPE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED. SO IT'S, I THINK ALL REALLY WELL DONE AND WELL WELL LANDSCAPED AND FEATURED. THIS IS THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT. I FORGOT TO MENTION THIS WALL IS THE WALL THAT MARK MENTIONED WITH VINES. THE INTENT IS TO MAKE THAT A GREEN WALL. SO THAT ENTIRE WALL WILL BE COVERED WITH VINES. WE'RE USING A PLANT CALLED CONFEDERATE JASMINE AND THEN LAYERS OF GROUND COVERS UNDERNEATH IT. AND THEN THIS IS A CUTAWAY VIEW. THIS IS JUST THE SHRUBS. IN ADDITION TO THAT, THERE'S A WHOLE NOTHER TREE ZONE THAT GOES ON TOP OF THAT. SO THIS WHOLE POOL AREA WILL BE VERY PRIVATE. SO THE EXPERIENCE OF THE POOL DECK WILL BE MORE IN THE TREE LEVEL THAN ON THE GROUND LEVEL, WHICH I THINK CREATES A REALLY NEAT EFFECT. THESE ARE ALL LARGE DENSE CANOPY TREES. THEY'LL EITHER BE GREEN BUTTONWOOD OR CALOPHYLLUM, WHICH IS BOTH TREES ARE KIND OF INTERCHANGEABLE WITH EACH OTHER AND A CONTINUATION OF THAT ALONG THE SIDE HERE, SOUTHWEST CORNER. AGAIN, THE ABUNDANCE OF LANDSCAPE THAT YOU SEE, THESE ARE COCONUT PALMS, GUMBO, LIMBO TREES, AGAIN FOR THE ISLAND TREES AS A FEATURE TREE. AND THEN THE LARGE LIVE OAK TREES THAT FILL IN THE ISLANDS AND BACK TO THE DATE PALM LA SOUTHEAST CORNER. YOU CAN SEE THE TREE LINE THAT'S KIND OF SCREENING THE BUFFER OF THE POOL DECK, AND THEN SOME MORE PALM TREES. THESE ARE ROYAL PALMS AGAIN FOR THE VERTICAL EXPERIENCE. TO HELP CREATE A PERSPECTIVE SCALE TO THE SPACE.

THE PAVERS. AS I MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, THIS IS NOW THE POOL DECK WITH THE PALM TREES.

THESE ARE COCONUT PALMS. WE HAVE MONTGOMERY PALMS AND OTHER SPECIES WITHIN IT. MORE DATE PALMS THAT ARE AROUND THE POOL DECK, AND THEN THE COURTYARD WITH THE HANDFUL OF VERTICAL PALMS AND VARYING SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS. AN ENLARGEMENT OF THAT SPACE. AND AGAIN, I'M HAPPY TO COME BACK AND GET INTO DETAIL ON THESE. IF YOU LIKE THE POOL DECK ENLARGEMENT, YOU CAN SEE HOW LUSH AND WELL LANDSCAPE THAT IS. PLANT LIST AND THEN A SMORGASBORD OF PLANT

[01:20:02]

PICTURES HERE OF THE VARIETY OF SPECIES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED, SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS. YOU CAN SEE THERE'S QUITE A VARIETY HERE. LIGHTING. WE DO PROPOSE A VARIETY OF POLE LIGHTS AND BOLLARD LIGHTS. SO FOR THE PEDESTRIAN SPACES, WE'RE PROPOSING SMALL BOLLARD LIGHTS THAT ARE IN THE 3 TO 42 INCH RANGE, AND THEN THE PARKING LOT LIGHTS THAT ARE SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY TO PROVIDE PROPER ILLUMINATION. THE PLAN, AS DEPICTED SO FAR, DEPICTS TWO DIFFERENT STYLES OF EACH. SO WE'RE STILL NAVIGATING A OR B SCENARIOS, BUT THE INTENT IS TO TRY TO MAKE IT KIND OF A DARK SKY ENVIRONMENT WHERE THE LIGHTS CONCEALED IN A BLADE TYPE FIXTURE, SO THE LIGHT SOURCE IS NOT EXPOSED. AGAIN, ENLARGEMENT SHOWING MORE OF THE LIGHTS. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS NOW OR COME BACK IF YOU LIKE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. VERY NICE. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. FOR THE RECORD, ANDREW ROTH WITH DAVIDSON ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, LICENSED IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND BEEN PRACTICING LOCALLY FOR A LITTLE OVER 19 YEARS. GOING TO START HERE JUST BY TAKING YOU THROUGH THE SITE PLAN. WHERE, AS WAS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED, THE MAIN ACCESS COMES AT THE INTERSECTION OF SEVENTH AVENUE NORTH AND GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. ONCE YOU'RE INTO THIS INTERNAL ROAD, GOOD ROAD MAIN ACCESS IS HERE AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. YOU TRAVEL THROUGH THIS PERMEABLE PAVER SURFACE UP TO THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF THE HOTEL IN THIS LOCATION FOR DROP OFF AND PARKING IS AVAILABLE TO THE WEST AND AS WELL AS AROUND TO THE NORTH. ACCESS INTO THE STRUCTURED PARKING. WE HAVE A SECONDARY ACCESS. THERE'S AN EXISTING INTERCONNECTION TO THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN. AND THEN AS WELL AS WE'VE GOT OUR SERVICE DRIVEWAY IN THE REAR HERE, WHERE FUNCTIONS SUCH AS LOADING AND SOLID WASTE WILL OCCUR, COMPLETELY SCREENED BEHIND WALLS AND LANDSCAPING. THE PROJECT IS PARKED FOR THE CITY OF NAPLES, LDC, AS WELL AS THE COMP PLAN. WE HAVE 290 PARKING SPACES REQUIRED AND PROVIDED. THE COMP PLAN REQUIRES ONE SPACE PER HOTEL ROOM KEY, WHEREAS THE LDC REQUIRES 285 PARKING SPACES.

PRESENT DESIGN HAS 133 PARKING SPACES ON SITE. SO THE SURFACE PARKING AND THEN THERE'S 157 PARKING SPACES WITHIN THE STRUCTURE ITSELF. SO IT'S A FAIRLY EVEN SPLIT, BUT THE MAJORITY IS WITHIN THE STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING. AND THEN, AS WAS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED, THIS WESTERN PORTION OF THE SITE IS REALLY OPEN GREEN SPACE FOR RECREATING AND BUFFERING FROM THE ROADWAY, AS WELL AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE WEST. TAKE YOU INTO THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT HERE NEXT. SO THE PROPERTY, AS WE KNOW IS, IS PRESENTLY UNDEVELOPED.

THERE'S NO EXISTING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ON SITE. THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN A MASTER SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ERP, WHICH WE'RE PRESENTLY UNDERWAY WITH, FILING A MODIFICATION WITH SOUTH FLORIDA. WE'VE GONE THROUGH ONE ROUND OF REVIEW AND READY TO MAKE OUR SECOND SUBMITTAL HERE, LIKELY THIS WEEK. WE'RE. WE'RE. WE'VE PROPOSED 0.287 ACRE FEET OF WATER QUALITY STORAGE ON SITE. THE CITY WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENT IS 0.248 ACRE FEET.

SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENT IS 0.285 ACRE FEET.

SO THIS WATER QUALITY IS PROVIDED IN THE FORM OF DRY PRETREATMENT. WE'VE EMPLOYED VARIOUS SYSTEMS FOR THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT ON SITE, SO WE'VE GOT A COMBINATION OF ABOVE GROUND DRY RETENTION AREAS. THERE'S ONE AREA HERE IN THE CENTRAL EASTERN PORTION, ANOTHER ONE TO THE NORTHEAST, AS WELL AS TO THE NORTHWEST. OVER IN THIS GREEN SPACE. THEN WE ALSO HAVE PERMEABLE PAVER SYSTEM, WHICH YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THIS ENTRANCE DRIVE UP TO THE MAIN ENTRY OF THE HOTEL WHERE WE'VE GOT STORMWATER BEING STORED IN THE AGGREGATE BENEATH THERE. THE PERMEABLE PAVER DRIVE APRONS TO THE EAST, WHICH ARE HERE AND HERE. YOU

[01:25:07]

KNOW, WE'RE ALSO WE'RE ALSO A DESIGN ELEMENT, BUT THEY'RE IN AT THE SAME TIME, THEY'RE PROVIDING ADDITIONAL STORMWATER QUALITY STORAGE, WHICH IS ABOVE AND BEYOND ANYTHING THAT WAS QUANTIFIED OR REPORTED. SO FOLLOWING THE ON SITE STORMWATER PRETREATMENT, STORMWATER OUTFALLS TO THE MASTER STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. SO THE PRETREATMENT IS ADDING TO THE TREATMENT TERRAIN THAT EXISTS TODAY OF BMPS. SO YOU'VE GOT THE ON SITE DRY PRETREATMENT FIRST. SECOND, IT GOES TO THE MASTER WET DETENTION LAKE. IN THE CENTER OF THE COMMONS. THERE'S A FIVE ACRE LAKE THERE. THIRD, IT GOES THROUGH A SPREADER SOIL IN THE NATIVE VEGETATION AREA TO THE EAST. ULTIMATELY, IT'S NOW FALLING TO THE GORDON RIVER. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S A NUMBER OF SYSTEMS IN THE TRAIN HERE TO TREAT THE STORMWATER BEFORE IT GETS TO THE GORDON RIVER. LASTLY, I'LL TAKE YOU JUST THROUGH, YOU KNOW. I COULD SHOW YOU ON THIS SCREEN JUST UTILITIES. WE'VE GOT A SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION PROPOSED TO THE NORTH. THERE'S A CITY SANITARY SEWER MAIN THAT RUNS RIGHT ALONG THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE. THERE'S A UTILITY EASEMENT THERE THAT'S SHARED BETWEEN THIS PROPERTY AND THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. AND OUR POTABLE WATER CONNECTION WILL BE TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER HERE, WHERE THE CITY HAS A 12 INCH WATER MAIN RUNNING ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF GOODLETTE FRANK.

SO WE'LL BE CONNECTING THERE FOR BOTH DOMESTIC WATER AS WELL AS FIRE PROTECTION. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION HERE FOR QUESTIONS NOW OR LATER. AND I CAN BRING UP THE NEXT PART OF THE PRESENTATION PRESENTATIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS NORMAN TREBILCOCK. I'M A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, CERTIFIED PLANNER AND PROFESSIONAL TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ENGINEER WITH OVER 36 YEARS OF LOCAL EXPERIENCE, AND I'VE PRESENTED BEFORE COUNCIL IN THE PAST AS WELL. WE PREPARED THE TRAFFIC STUDIES FOR THE PROJECT.

YOU ALL HAVE MORE OF THE REPORTS, BUT WE PREPARED A TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT. WE ALSO DID AN INTERSECTION ANALYSIS, AND WE ALSO LOOKED AT THE OVERALL PD PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND LOOKED AT WHERE IT IS RELATIVE TO THE TRIP CAP THAT'S BEEN ESTABLISHED TO SEE WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT TO DATE AND APPROVED TO DATE, WHERE THAT STANDS VERSUS WHAT, WHAT'S ALLOWED. SO ALL THAT INFORMATION. SO I'LL JUST KIND OF COVER THROUGH THOSE ITEMS THIS MORNING. SO FROM A TRAFFIC STANDPOINT, WE LOOK AT THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM BASED ON THE ROOMS FOR THE TRIP GENERATION. WE USE THE INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS LATEST MANUAL FOR THAT. WE DO LOOK AT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS FOR THE PROJECT AS WELL. THE MOST RECENT DATA THE CITY HAD AVAILABLE. AND AS MENTIONED, WE LOOKED AT THE PROPOSED MAXIMUM TRIP CAP TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE WITHIN THAT CRITERIA AS WELL. AND THEN I PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION CONCLUSIONS FOR THE PROJECT. SO AGAIN, FROM A TRAFFIC STANDPOINT, T I S THE HOTEL, YOU LOOK AT THE NUMBER OF ROOMS AS THE TRIP GENERATOR THAT TAKES INTO ACCOUNT ALL THE ELEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOTEL, WHICH WOULD BE EMPLOYEES, VISITORS, GUESTS, AND EVEN ACTIVITIES. IF YOU HAVE AN INTERNAL RESTAURANT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, IT'S ALL ACCOUNTED FOR, KIND OF WHAT THEY CALL BAKED IN TO THAT CRITERIA. AND SO THEN WE COME UP WITH A AM AND PM PEAK AS WELL AS A DAILY A PEAK. PM PEAK IS WHAT TYPICALLY WE USE FOR LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS. OOPS. AND IN THE LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS, WE LOOK AT THE KEY ROADS NEARBY. WHETHER WE HAVE A AN IMPACT, THE DEGREE OF IMPACT AND WHETHER THERE'S A LEVEL OF SERVICE, STANDARD FAILURE EXISTING WITHOUT THE PROJECT, OR IF THE PROJECT CREATES A FAILURE AND NO CASES. IS THERE ANY FAILURES CREATED? THE OTHER ELEMENT OF WHAT WE LOOK AT IS WE LOOKED AT THE OVERALL COMMONS PD PLAN DEVELOPMENT, AND ITS TRIP CAP IS BASED ON A PM PEAK HOUR GAZETTE IS THE THE GREATEST TRIP GENERATION THAT OCCURS. AND TYPICALLY YOU FIND THAT IN DEVELOPMENTS. AND SO WE'VE LOOKED AT WHAT HAS BEEN APPROVED OR BUILT OUT ON SITE. THE DWELLING UNITS OFFICE, ASSISTED LIVING. AND THEN WE

[01:30:03]

ADDED OUR PROPOSED HOTEL. AND SO WE COME UP WITH A PM PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION OF 794.

THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE IS 1545. SO WE'RE WELL UNDER THAT IN TERMS OF BUILD OUT. AND AND THERE REALLY AREN'T TOO MANY PARCELS LEFT TO BE DEVELOPED. SO ULTIMATELY IT WOULD BE UNDER, I THINK, THE ANTICIPATED CAP, BUT WE'RE CERTAINLY WELL BELOW IT AT THIS POINT. SO LOOKING AT SOME OF THE CONCLUSIONS THERE, THE PROJECT IT'S IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT AN ADVERSE GENERATOR AT THIS LOCATION BASED ON THE LEVELS OF SERVICE IT. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY EXTERNAL NEW CONNECTIONS TO THE ROAD NETWORK. IT'S. WE'RE JUST GOING TO HAVE THE SAME. THE COMMONS CONNECTION WILL STICK. COMMONS DRIVE. THAT'S WHAT WE'LL USE AND CONNECT TO. WE'LL ALSO RETAIN THE INTERCONNECT TO THE CASTLE PD TO THE NORTH OF US. SO REMEMBER THE OLD CASTLE BANK THAT USED TO BE THERE THAT NOW IS ALL FENCED OFF. BUT WE'LL MAINTAIN AN INTERCONNECTION TO THAT BECAUSE THAT'S IMPORTANT TO MOVE TRAFFIC CONSERVATIVELY. I DON'T INCLUDE ANY OF THAT BENEFITS OF THOSE INTERCONNECTS. IN OUR ANALYSIS, WE'RE LOOKING AT EVERYTHING HITTING THE COMMONS DRIVE FROM FROM AN ANALYSIS STANDPOINT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, CURRENTLY IT'S ALL FENCED OFF TODAY. WE COULDN'T CONNECT TO IT TODAY, BUT WE WILL HAVE THAT AS AVAILABLE RESOURCE. THERE IS ADEQUATE AND SUFFICIENT ROADWAY CAPACITY BASED ON USING THE LATEST DATA THAT THAT IS AVAILABLE. THE PM PEAK HOUR IS FOR THE WHOLE PLAN. DEVELOPMENT IS LESS THAN WHAT IS ALLOWED FOR THE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL. ANOTHER IMPORTANT COORDINATING POINT THAT WE DID DO ON THE PROJECT. SO GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD IS A COLLIER COUNTY ROADWAY, SO CITY STAFF DID MAKE SURE THAT WE COORDINATED WITH COLLIER COUNTY ON THAT TO LOOK AT ANY ISSUES THAT THEY WERE CONCERNED WITH. AND, AND CITY STAFF HAD A SIMILAR CONCERN, MAINLY THAT SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE THAT'S OUT THERE TO TO LOOK AT THAT, TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IMPROVING THE CONDITIONS WITH THAT. AND THEN THAT THAT'S A BIG PART OF THE REASON WHY WE RAN THE ANALYSIS. THERE ARE CONSTRAINTS ON THE ROADWAY ON GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. IF YOU LOOK LIKE NORTHBOUND ON GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD, ON A DIVIDED HIGHWAY LIKE THAT, TYPICALLY YOU REQUIRE TURN LANES JUST BY CODE COLLIER COUNTY, BUT THEY RECOGNIZE THE FACT THAT IN CERTAIN AREAS YOU'RE YOU'RE CONSTRAINED IN THIS AREA, WE'RE CONSTRAINED BECAUSE THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY BASICALLY IS NEAR THE BACK OF SIDEWALK OUT THERE. AND SO THAT YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO PUT IN A, A NORTHBOUND RIGHT TURN LANE, THAT THAT'S REALLY WARRANTED BY EXISTING CONDITIONS, NOT BY THIS PROJECT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. AND THERE'S OTHER CONSTRAINING FACTORS, EXISTING SIGNAL AND SUCH. BUT FOR THE SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE, THAT IS AN AREA WHERE WE CAN HELP IMPROVE THAT. AND SO WHAT WE'VE WORKED OUT IN WITH COUNTY STAFF IS IMPROVING THE EXISTING CONDITIONS OUT THERE. THERE'S A VERY LONG TAPER. IT'S 180 FOOT LONG TAPER. AND THEN YOU HAVE A THROUGH PORTION OF THE LANES. AND WHAT WE'LL PLAN TO DO IS ACTUALLY EXTEND THE THROUGH PORTION TO MAKE IT LONGER AND SHORTEN THE TAPER TO JUST WHAT WE CALL LIKE A 50 FOOT TAPER. THAT'S MORE THE MODERN DESIGN WE DO. SO IT ALLOWS MORE CARS TO REALLY QUEUE UP INTO THE TURN LANE, AND THEN WE'LL EXTEND THAT TURN LANE AN ADDITIONAL 75FT FOR THE PROJECT. SO THE EXISTING CONDITIONS IS IS ROUGHLY 300FT BETWEEN THIS LONG TAPER AND THE THROUGH PORTION. AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO EXTEND IT FURTHER. SO WE'LL HAVE A 375 FOOT LONG TURN LANE THAT WILL REALLY IMPROVE CONDITIONS FOR FOLKS MAKING THAT SOUTHBOUND LEFT INTO THE SIGNALIZED CONDITIONS. THIS WILL WORK OUT WITH COLLIER COUNTY AS A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT, BUT WE'RE IDENTIFYING IT AS A COMMITMENT THAT WE'RE GOING TO IMPROVE THAT TURN LANE AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. OKAY, SO IN ADDITION TO THAT, THEN MITIGATION IMPACT, WE WOULD PAY APPROPRIATE IMPACT FEES FOR THE PROJECT AS WELL AS BUILDING PERMITS ARE ISSUED FOR IT AS WELL. SO WITH THAT, I'LL TURN THINGS OVER TO FRANCESCA AND THEN I'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE AS WELL. OKAY. THANK YOU. OOPS. THERE WE GO. TILL THE END. THANK YOU NORM. BEAR WITH ME. WE DID HAVE AN EXTENSIVE PRESENTATION. OKAY.

OKAY. I'LL CONCLUDE WITH IN RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED JUST TO, TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE PART OF THE RECORD AS WELL. OUR BUILDING IS SLIGHTLY TO THE WEST OF THE BUILDING

[01:35:03]

IMMEDIATELY TO OUR SOUTH, AND YOU'LL SEE THAT IN THE AERIAL RENDERINGS THAT MR. MCLEAN PUT ON THE SCREEN FOR YOU TODAY. THE DISTINCTION FROM THE PROPERTY TO OUR SOUTH IS CLEAR, HOWEVER, BOTH WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING THE SITE AS WELL AS WHEN YOU LOOK AT OUR SITE PLAN IN TERMS OF THE EXTENSIVE BUFFERING AND OPEN SPACE THAT WE'LL BE PROVIDING ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. IN ADDITION, OUR PROPERTY IN TERMS OF MIRRORING ON THE OTHER SIDE OF GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD, FACES A LINEAR PARK. UNLIKE THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, THERE WAS A QUESTION AS IN TERMS OF WHETHER UNDERGROUND PARKING WAS REVIEWED AT THE TIME THAT THIS WAS SUBMITTED, THAT THERE WAS A DOUBT OVER WHETHER OR NOT UNDERGROUND PARKING WAS PERMITTED IN THE CITY SPECIFIC TO THE COMMONS. THAT WASN'T ADDRESSED IN THE COMMONS PD, AND WE DID EVERYTHING WE COULD TO STAY WITHIN THE COMMONS PD PARAMETERS IN THE CITY CODE. SO WHEN THIS BEGAN, THIS BEGAN ALWAYS AS A DESIGN PARAMETER TO FOLLOW THE PD AND TO FOLLOW THE CITY CODE AND NOT DEVIATE IN ANY WAY. AND FINALLY, IN TERMS OF TRANSPORTATION INTERCONNECTIVITY, THAT ALSO WAS PAINSTAKINGLY TO CONFORM TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT. THAT MEANS THAT THERE IS NO CURB CUT ONTO GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD INTERNAL TO THE SITE.

HOTEL WOULD NORMALLY WANT THAT SORT OF ENTRY, BUT WE RESPECTED THE INTERNAL CONFIGURATION, WHICH RELIEVES TRAFFIC FROM GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. MR. TREBILCOCK EXPLAINED THAT THERE IS NO RIGHT OF WAY TO PROVIDE A RIGHT TURN IN THAT WOULD REQUIRE SOME SORT OF EMINENT DOMAIN THROUGH PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF THE COMMONS. HOWEVER, WE ARE WE ARE HONORING THIS INTERCONNECTION FROM THE INTERNAL LOOP ROAD TO THE PROJECT TO THE NORTH. IF AND WHEN THAT PROJECT IS REDEVELOPED AND THEY PROVIDE LEGAL ACCESS RIGHTS THAT COULD BE AN INTERCONNECTION NORTH AND SOUTH. WE WOULD COOPERATE WITH THAT OWNER, OF COURSE, TO FACILITATE TRAFFIC SOUTHBOUND THROUGH OUR INTERCONNECT. RIGHT NOW, THE THE INTERCONNECTION IS NORTHBOUND AS IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN HISTORICALLY. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THOSE WERE PART OF THE RECORD. MY CONCLUDING REMARKS ARE TO SUMMARIZE, WE ARE WITHIN ALL DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS VESTED AND ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY CODE. WE PROVIDE ADDITIONAL GREEN SPACE BUFFERING AND PEDESTRIAN INTERCONNECTIVITY. WE EXCEED EXCEED STORMWATER STANDARDS REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF NAPLES. WE FLOW ALL VEHICULAR USE INTERNAL TO THE COMMONS AS CONTEMPLATED WITHIN THE 1980 APPROVALS AND RATIFIED BY THE CITY OF NAPLES IN 2017. WE PROMOTE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT OUR COST BEYOND WHAT IS WARRANTED BY THE PROJECT, WHICH WAS IN RESPECT TO THE REQUEST BY YOUR STAFF AND AS A HALLMARK TO OUR PROJECT. THIS WAS DEVELOPED WITH EXTENSIVE NEIGHBOR INVOLVEMENT, SEVERAL MEETINGS AND VOLUNTARY OUTREACH OPPORTUNITIES. MY ENTIRE TEAM IS HERE FOR DETAIL, DETAILED QUESTIONS. BUT THAT THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

THE PROJECT. I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT ELIMINATED THE ROOFTOP BAR AND RESTAURANT, WHICH HAD LARGE OPPOSITION FROM THE NEIGHBORING NEIGHBORHOODS AND SURROUNDING AREA. SO I APPRECIATE THAT. I HAVE QUESTIONS, BUT COUNCIL, DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONERS? AGENT, MISS ROMA PARKER, BUT DO YOU HAVE. OKAY. OKAY. YES, I DO, BUT IF YOU WANT TO GO FIRST. NO. GO AHEAD. BACK TO THE THE TRAFFIC IN THE LACK OF A RIGHT HAND TURN LANE GOING NORTH ON GOODLETTE. AS I EXPRESSED TO YOU, I HAVE A REAL CONCERN ABOUT THAT BECAUSE ANECDOTALLY TO ME TODAY, WE HAVE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS ON GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD, PARTICULARLY IN THAT PEAK TIME, YOU KNOW, WHEN PEOPLE ARE GOING HOME FROM WORK OR ARRIVING AT THE HOTEL PERHAPS. SO I FEEL LIKE THERE'S AN ISSUE ALREADY THAT'S GOING TO BE GREATLY COMPOUNDED WHEN FDOT STARTS WORKING ON HIGHWAY 41 AND JUST THE NEXT FEW YEARS, AND THAT'S, I'M GUESSING, A 2 TO 3 YEAR PROJECT WHERE A LOT OF TRAFFIC WILL BE ROUTED ONTO GOODLETTE.

IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME, NAUM, YOUR ANALYSIS WAS BASED ON HISTORIC TRAFFIC LEVELS AND TRAFFIC PATTERNS, BUT DID YOU ALSO CONSIDER FUTURE TRAFFIC AND THE IMPACT OF THE 41 ROUTING?

[01:40:01]

BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT TO FORCE PEOPLE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU KNOW, IF IF THEY CAN'T TRAVEL GOODLETTE AND THEY CAN'T TRAVEL 41, THEY'RE GOING TO GO TO 10TH STREET OR SOME SOMEWHERE ELSE THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOODS. AND I JUST WANT TO KNOW, HAVE YOU CONSIDERED THE FUTURE TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT CAN BE DONE TO MITIGATE? OKAY, JUST TWO SECONDS LEGALLY. AND NORM, I WANT YOU TO SPEAK TO YOUR TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS BECAUSE IT IS FORWARD LOOKING AND IT ACCOMMODATES ALL CITY DATA, BUT LEGALLY THE RIGHT OF WAY TO THE SOUTH OF THE PROJECT, WHICH IS NOT WITHIN THE COMMONS, DOES NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT RIGHT OF WAY FOR A TURN LANE FOR A SAFE TURN LANE. WE DID TALK WITH MISS BICKET ABOUT THIS ISSUE IN RESPONSE TO THE EXACT SAME POINT RAISED BY THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD, AND NORMAL EXPLAINED THAT THIS IS A CONDITION UP AND DOWN MULTIPLE CORRIDORS. WHEN YOU HAVE CONSTRAINED RIGHT OF WAY AND THERE'S REALLY NO OPTION TO CREATE A TURN LANE. BUT I JUST WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT, THAT IT IS SOMETHING WE DEFINITELY LOOKED AT. AND UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S JUST NO LEGAL RIGHT OF WAY TO PROVIDE A TURN LANE IN THAT LOCATION. BUT NORM, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHAT WHAT WENT INTO YOUR TRAFFIC STUDY, PLEASE? YES. SO, SO WE DID, WE DID USE THE WE USE THE PEAK SEASON TRAFFIC DATA. WE, WE DID IT ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, LAST FEBRUARY IS WHAT WE DID THE LATEST FOR THAT ANALYSIS. WE DID PUT IN A GROWTH RATE TO IT FOR IT. BUT WE, I DIDN'T LIKE SAY SPECIFICALLY OR A REROUTING OF US. 41 I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANY, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, DOCUMENTED DATA OF WHAT THEY ANTICIPATE, SAY, WHAT THAT TRAFFIC WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY, I, I USE IT, I, YOU KNOW, THIS ROADWAY IS MY WAY HOME EVERY DAY. AND SO I'M, YOU KNOW, REAL FAMILIAR WITH IT. AND, AND THIS CONDITION, YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY ISN'T, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE, WHERE WE DID A, I THINK A GOOD EFFORT OF REPAIR IS ON THE SOUTHBOUND LEFT. THERE'S REALLY NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THE NORTHBOUND. RIGHT.

BUT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE IS, IS REALLY SUFFICIENT. WE'RE WE'RE AT LEVEL OF SERVICE. SEE, YOU'RE ALLOWED TO GO DOWN TO SAY A LEVEL SERVICE E THERE. BUT YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S A BIT OF A CONUNDRUM THAT WAY, YOU KNOW, IN ADDITION TO THE RIGHT OF WAY ISSUE, YOU KNOW, THE EXISTING SIGNAL SYSTEM KIND OF LOCKS THINGS IN TO WHERE THE STRAIN POLES ARE. AND IT'S NOT LIKE YOU CAN JUST, YOU KNOW, PUSH THAT OUT, YOU REDO THE WHOLE SIGNAL SYSTEM AND EVERYTHING. SO DID YOU ALL LOOK AT ACQUIRING MORE LAND TO THE SOUTH FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH THAT OTHER PROPERTY OWNER APPROACHING THEM AND SAYING, HEY, CAN WE PAY FOR SOME OF THAT LAND? SO A RIGHT HAND TURN LANE COULD BE ADDED IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, NOT NOT READILY, BECAUSE THEY HAVE CONSTRAINTS AS WELL, YOU KNOW, WITH WHERE THEIR BUFFER BUFFERS ARE, WHERE THEIR SITE IS DESIGNED AS WELL. NORMALLY IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY BY CODE HAS CRITERIA. IF IT'S IF IT'S A GOVERNMENT ACTION THAT THAT TAKES SOMETHING, THEN THEY CAN DEAL WITH THAT, THAT CONDITION. BUT IT ISN'T TYPICAL. IT'S NOT IT WOULDN'T BE NORMAL TO DO THAT IN THE SITUATION AS WELL. SO AND AGAIN, THIS THE CAPACITY IS SUFFICIENT. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, NORMALLY RIGHT TURN LANES ARE ARE MORE EFFICIENT TO TO OCCUR. THE LEFT TURN LANES IS REALLY WHAT CREATES THE MOST, YOU KNOW, FRICTION FOR SYSTEMS. SO THAT'S WHY WE KIND OF FOCUSED ON THAT AS WELL FOR THAT REASON AND WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND REALLY WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO, BUT WE THOUGHT IT WOULD, WOULD MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. AND, AND REALLY HAVING THAT INTERCONNECTION I THINK WILL BE HELPFUL TO, YOU KNOW, TO THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE A RIGHT HAND TURN LANE TO THE NORTH OF COMMONS, DRIVE WHATEVER IT'S CALLED INTO THAT INTERCONNECT TO BRING PEOPLE AROUND TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE HOTEL AND CIRCLE AROUND THAT WAY. IT'S A SLIGHTLY OTHER LEGAL ISSUE. SO AS I WAS INDICATING, WE WE ARE PRESERVING THE INTERCONNECTION THROUGH OUR SITE. THAT PROPERTY TO THE NORTH IS LIKEWISE OUTSIDE OF THE COMMONS IF AND WHEN IT'S REDEVELOPED AND THEY PROVIDE LEGAL ACCESS. I'M SUGGESTING THAT AN INTERCONNECTION THAT ALREADY IS, EXISTS AND IS PART PART OF OUR SITE PLAN WOULD FACILITATE EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.

AND SO THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE'D WANT TO COOPERATE WITH THEM ON. BUT I DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE A LEGAL RIGHT TO GO OVER THEIR PROPERTY FROM GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. CAN I ASK ON THAT? WE LOOKED AT ALL OF THESE ISSUES AND THE SITE PLAN IS SUFFICIENT IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL TRANSPORTATION LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT'S REQUIRED AND THE WAY THAT THE COMMONS WAS

[01:45:01]

SET UP AND ALWAYS HAVING ACCESS FROM FROM FRANK ROAD IN THIS LOCATION. SO, SO THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME ASK THIS BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO AND IT TIES IN. SO THAT INTERCONNECTION ROAD ON THE SITE PLAN, WHERE IS THAT AND HOW WILL THAT AFFECT IN THE FUTURE? AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S IN WITHIN THE DOCUMENTS? YES, MA'AM. YES, MADAM MAYOR, I'LL SHOW YOU THIS ON YOUR SCREEN BECAUSE I THINK THAT THIS ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN, BUT IT'S PART OF ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED. MR. ROTH'S ENGINEERING MATERIALS. MR. ANDREAS, ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN AND MR. MCLEAN'S ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS. SO THIS INTERCONNECTION FROM SEVENTH AVENUE NORTH OR GOODLETTE ROAD TO THE NORTH, WILL BE CONTINUED AND WILL BE HONORED THROUGH OUR SITE PLAN. I THINK THERE WAS A MAP SOMEWHERE IN THE MATERIALS OF THE WHOLE COMMONS THAT SHOWED HOW THAT ROAD. YES. SITE PLAN ONE AS HER. THERE WE ARE.

THAT'S PROBABLY BETTER THAN THAT SLIDE. SURE. THIS. THIS. THIS MAP, HOWEVER, DOES NOT SHOW THAT INTERCONNECTION. SO THAT IS PROVIDED HISTORICALLY AND AN ACCESS EASEMENT WAS RECORDED AND SHOWN ON THE PLAT FOR THAT INTERCONNECTION. SO THAT WILL BE CONTINUED FROM TRACK TWO THE HOTEL SITE TO THAT TO THAT PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF THE COMMONS. SO IT'LL BE RECORDED ON THIS PLAT. YOU'VE SPOKEN TO LEGAL ABOUT THAT. IT'S SHOWN ON THE RECORDED PLAT.

AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE PLAT MATERIALS AS A SUPPLEMENT IN OUR PRESENTATION THROUGH A LINK IF WE WANT TO PULL THAT UP. YEAH. I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT IN THIS IN OUR IN OUR PACKET. IT WAS IT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY OF NAPLES DECADES AGO. IF YOU'D LIKE, FOR ME TO HAVE DAVID SWITCH TO OUR LINKS TAB AND PULL UP THE PLAT, WE CAN DO THAT, BUT I'LL TESTIFY INTO THE RECORD THAT THAT IS IT'S AN INTERCONNECTION THAT WE'RE PRESERVING. OKAY. SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DAVID HAS, BUT THE STAFF DO YOU HAVE IS THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS PACKET. IT'S NOT PART OF YOUR PACKET. YOU'RE CORRECT. IT'S NOT PART OF THE PACKET. IT'S PUBLIC RECORD.

IT'S A RECORDED PLAT DOCUMENT. OKAY. HOWEVER, EVERYTHING IN YOUR RECORD SHOWS THAT WE'RE PRESERVING THAT INTERCONNECTION. SO I JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT IT IS IT AN INSTRUMENT OF RECORD IN ADDITION TO THE MATERIALS THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, AND IT'S ALSO SHOWN ON THE SURVEY THERE IS IN YOUR PACKET, THERE'S A SURVEY OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY. AND THE SURVEY DOES SHOW THAT INTERCONNECTION AS WELL. IS THAT A CERTIFIED SURVEY? IT IS.

OKAY. I'M SORRY, VICE MAYOR. THANK YOU FOR THAT. THAT'S THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE TRAFFIC IS A BIG CONCERN FOR ME. AND THEN AS YOU KNOW, MY OTHER CONCERN IS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AND THAT THIS PROPOSED BUILDING IS EIGHT FLOORS AND SIX FLOORS OF HOTEL, OVER TWO FLOORS OF PARKING. AND THEN I COMPARE THAT TO THE ADVANCED MEDICAL BUILDING ALMOST NEXT DOOR TO IT. THAT'S FIVE FLOORS, FOUR FLOORS FOR THE OFFICE SPACE, OVER ONE FLOOR OF PARKING. SO THERE'S A THREE FLOOR DIFFERENCE. AND I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE YOU ALL LISTENING TO THE NEIGHBORS, ADDING LOTS OF LANDSCAPING, KEEPING THE TREES, TRYING TO DISGUISE OR MITIGATE THAT IMPACT AS MUCH AS AS YOU CAN. I JUST STILL HAVE HAVE THAT CONCERN. CAN YOU TELL ME, HOW DOES THIS BUILDING LINE UP TO THE ADVANCED MEDICAL BUILDING? LIKE IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT THEM SIDE BY SIDE, IS THIS BUILDING CLOSER TO THE ROAD TO THE GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD THAN ADVANCED MEDICAL? YES. AS AS INDICATED IN MY CONCLUDING REMARKS, IT IS SLIGHTLY CLOSER. IT'S SOMETHING TO KEEP IN MIND.

THIS WAS A PROJECT IN COLLIER COUNTY, BUT FOR THE CITY'S FORESIGHT IN ANNEXING THE PROPERTY, WE WOULDN'T HAVE GONE THROUGH SUCH AN EXTENSIVE EXERCISE TO CREATE WHAT WE BELIEVE IS A BEAUTIFUL PROJECT. YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THE SETBACKS THAT YOU SEE BECAUSE THE OVERLAY COMES THROUGH THE CITY AS WELL. SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS MAYBE CONFUSING IN THE SENSE THAT THE CITY HAS A CHARTER HEIGHT, AND WE ARE ALL CONFIDENT WITH THE CHARTER HEIGHT. HOWEVER, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THIS ON A SITE SPECIFIC BASIS BASED ON THE PROCEDURAL HISTORY THAT I SPENT AN EXTENSIVE TIME WALKING YOU THROUGH. IN THE BROADER CONTEXT, IF THIS WEREN'T PART OF THE CITY, THIS WOULD BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY BY THE COUNTY AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE. IN MY OPINION, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE ALL THE BEAUTIFICATION FEATURES THAT IS PRESENTED TO YOU. SO I, I EMPATHIZE WITH WITH SOME OF THE, THE DIFFICULTY IN THIS

[01:50:02]

DECISION. BUT THE COURT DETERMINED THE HEIGHTS VESTED. WE DID EVERYTHING TO MITIGATE IT AND MAKE IT A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING WORK WITH OUR NEIGHBORS. I REALLY THINK WE'VE GONE TO EXTENSIVE LENGTHS TO SHOW YOU SOMETHING THAT AS A MATTER OF RIGHT, COULD BE BUILT, BUT THAT WE WANTED TO MAKE ALL OF THE NEIGHBORLY CONCESSIONS THAT WE THAT WE THAT WE COULD ACCOMMODATE AND STILL MAKE THIS A VIABLE PROJECT. AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE COMMONS IS UNDERGOING, AS YOU ALL CAN SEE, THROUGH THE APPROVALS THAT HAVE BEEN ISSUED RECENTLY, A REVITALIZATION. IT'S BEEN DILAPIDATED FOR SOME TIME. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD THING THAT WE'RE ALL SEEING THAT THE COMMONS IS COMING BACK AND THAT WE'RE ALL PUTTING ATTENTION AND BEAUTIFICATION INTO THIS AREA OF THE CITY. SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WE KEEP THAT BROADER CONTEXT IN MIND TO ADDRESS. MR. BLANKENSHIP, YOU'RE WELL PLACED. MAY BE DIFFICULTY, BUT I NEED I NEED US TO ALL STAY FOCUSED ON WHAT THE WHAT THE LEGAL PARAMETERS ARE AROUND US APPROVAL, THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL ON THE BASIS OF THE CRITERIA. ALL RIGHT. I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTARY AND AND ALL THE VIEWS AND ALL THE WORK YOU GUYS HAVE DONE IN THAT REGARD. AND THANK YOU MAYOR. I'LL WAIT AND ASK STAFF A FEW QUESTIONS AS WELL. OKAY. YEAH, I APPRECIATE THAT THAT YOUR YOUR RIGHTS TO, TO BUILD THIS, BUT I THINK THE QUESTIONS WE'RE ASKING ARE ABOUT TRAFFIC AND, AND THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT OF WHAT WE CAN MAKE DECISIONS ON TODAY. AND I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT THE NAPLES AUTHORITY LETTER IN REFERENCE TO HEIGHT AND THEIR RELEASE. OR WHAT DO YOU WHAT DO YOU CALL THE DOCUMENT FOR THE FLYOVER ON AND HEIGHT FOR THE DECALS? AND MR. MACLEAN WILL SPEAK TO THAT TRAFFIC QUICKLY. A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT IS A, A VERY A VERY UNIQUE FEATURE OF FLORIDA STATUTE. AND THE TRIPS ARE ACTUALLY VESTED FOR THE PROJECT. SO THOSE SITE SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE MADE. AND WE'RE GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT SITE SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS HAVE TO BE MADE. THAT'S ALSO SOMETHING THAT IS WORTH NOTING AS A FOOTNOTE, JUST TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THIS IS AGAIN, A VERY UNIQUE AREA OF THE CITY. SO THAT'S A THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT. THOSE RIGHTS WERE VESTED IN 2015 OR 17. THEY WELL, THEY WERE RATIFIED BY THE CITY THROUGH A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT DEVELOPMENT ORDER IN 2017. BUT THEY WERE ORIGINALLY ANNEXED FROM THE CITY IN 1989. BUT THOSE ARE THE TRAFFIC COUNTS THAT WERE WERE BEING THE TRAFFIC COUNTS WERE ACTUALLY IMPOSED BY THE CITY IN 2017. BUT IT'S NOT A TRAFFIC COUNT. THAT'S PROBABLY NOT THE CORRECT, CORRECT TERMINOLOGY. IT IS A TRIP CAP. IT IS A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF TRIPS, BUT THE TRIPS THAT ARE GENERATED THROUGH THE PROJECT WERE VESTED WHEN APPROVED THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT. THAT'S WHY THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER PUTS SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS INTO THE NETWORK, INCLUDING THE SIGNALIZATION OF THE INTERSECTION. WHEN WERE THOSE CONTRIBUTIONS MADE TO THOSE SIGNALIZATION? THE SIGNAL. THE SIGNALIZATION WAS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT COMMITMENTS FROM 1980, SO THAT SIGNALIZATION AT AT GOODLETT AND SEVENTH AVENUE NORTH WAS TRIGGERED THROUGH THE PROJECT. IN FACT. BUT THAT WAS 2017, CORRECT? THAT WAS A COMMITMENT IN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT FROM 1980. OKAY. SO DOES THAT. IS THAT UPDATED OR IT IS UPDATED AT THIS POINT WITH THAT TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND MAYBE. MR. I DON'T KNOW WHAT UPDATED MEANS IN THAT CONTEXT. WELL, IF IT WAS BACK IN, IN 80. OH, THE SO THE, THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL, THE COST OF THAT, THAT WAS A COMMITMENT. HOWEVER, AS MR. TREBILCOCK NOTED, THE INTERSECTION ITSELF IS BEING IMPROVED THROUGH THIS PROJECT MORE THAN WHAT THE SITE SPECIFIC IMPACTS WOULD OTHERWISE WARRANT. I'M SORRY I MISUNDERSTOOD YOUR QUESTION ON WHAT COULDN'T FOLLOW THOSE DETAILS OF THAT. FURTHER IMPROVEMENTS, CORRECT? YES. THAT'S CORRECT. SO IF AND I, I DIDN'T MEAN TO GET INTO THIS CONVERSATION AGAIN NECESSARILY, BUT I WAS COMING BACK TO HIM.

SO I JUST JUMPED TO MR. MCLAIN ONLY BECAUSE IT WAS IN FRONT OF ME. NORM, DO YOU WANT TO QUICKLY EXPLAIN WHAT WE'RE DOING AT THE AT THE SOUTHBOUND. THANK YOU. LET ME SEE THE

[01:55:05]

COMMENTS. ARE WE SHOWING. OH, THERE WE GO. PERFECT. SO. OKAY, THIS IS A SLIDE. WHAT ENGINEERING DRAWING. I KNOW ERICA'S GOING TO PULL IT RIGHT UP FOR ME. I CAN'T FIND THE SLIDE SHOW CAN YOU? IS. YEAH. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WITH YOU. WE DON'T HAVE THIS SLIDESHOW IN OUR PRESENTATION PACKET. OH, I SEE OKAY. THANK YOU. SO IT'S NICE, BUT I DON'T HAVE WHAT IS BEING PRESENTED PACKAGE. I DON'T HAVE FRANCESCO'S OVERALL PACKAGE. I CAN'T FIND IT. I DON'T HAVE. IT SHOULD BE IN THE PRESENTATION PACKAGE, RIGHT. OR. OH SURE. OKAY. DAVID, DO YOU MIND PUTTING THIS ON THE SCREEN AGAIN? ARE YOU GOING TO PAGE 115 OF YOUR DOCUMENTATION FOR THE INTERSECTION OR. THIS IS JUST FROM THE PRESENTATION. I DON'T HAVE THAT. SO CAN YOU GO TO THE INFORMATION YOU PROVIDED AS FAR AS THE. IT IT DOESN'T. I MEAN, THIS IS A GOOD ILLUSTRATION OF WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF THE IMPROVEMENTS. IF YOU WANT. ALL RIGHT. OKAY. SO WE DON'T HAVE I GUESS THE CONFUSION HERE IS WE DON'T HAVE A PLAN SHOWING THE, THE THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS THEY HAVE. RIGHT. THEY'RE SHOWING YOU AN AERIAL, BUT WE DON'T HAVE THAT HASN'T BEEN DESIGNED YET. YEAH, EXACTLY. THEY HAVEN'T PERMITTED THEY HAVEN'T DESIGNED AND PERMITTED THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT THEY'RE COMMITTING THAT THEY WILL PARTICIPATE IN THAT INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT. BUT THEY HAVEN'T SUBMITTED THAT.

CORRECT. THAT WILL BE A CARRIER COUNTY RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT IS WHAT THAT WILL BE FOR. SO I SEE A LETTER FROM COLLIER COUNTY. IS THAT INDICATING THAT? RIGHT. CONCEPTUALLY, IN TERMS OF THEY WERE ACCEPTABLE WITH THE IDEAS FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND SO WHAT WE'LL ACTUALLY END UP DOING IS WE SUBMIT A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT, AND WE PROVIDE THEM AN UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY THAT SHOWS. AND THEN WE ALSO WILL PROVIDE THEM DESIGN PLANS FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS. AND SO THOSE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS. AND THAT'S WHY I CAN SHOW YOU THIS ILLUSTRATION OF, OF WHAT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU. YES. AND YOU KNOW, THE REASON I'M ASKING IS WHEN WE DID THE NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH CLINIC, WE THOUGHT WE HAD THAT ALL WORKED OUT. AND THERE WAS A PRELIMINARY WITH THE COUNTY. AND THEN IT WAS A MAJOR ISSUE IN TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE TRAFFIC FLOW COULD GO IN THERE. SO, I MEAN, THESE DETAILS ARE MATTER. AND UNDERSTANDING THE RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT WITH THE COUNTY IS IMPORTANT. SURE, SURE. AND NORMALLY I THINK THAT'S WHY YOUR STAFF HAD ALSO WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE HAD SOME ADVANCED COORDINATION, WHICH WE DID. AND THEN WE WOULD JUST FOLLOW UP WITH THESE ACTUAL IMPROVEMENTS THEMSELVES THAT GET THAT THE COUNTY WOULD APPROVE AS PART OF A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT. OKAY. SO SO WHAT, WHAT I WAS SHOWING YOU HERE, THIS IS THE EXISTING TURN LANE. THE TAPER REALLY BEGINS KIND OF STARTS WAY BACK HERE. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. THAT 180FT, IT'S A VERY LONG TAPER THAT YOU HAVE. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE ACTUAL THROUGH PORTION OF THE TURN LANE. IS THIS AREA HERE THAT'S ABOUT A 120 125FT. SO THE TOTAL TURN LANE LENGTH FROM THE STOP BAR RIGHT HERE, YOU SEE THE STOP BAR ALL THE WAY BACK IS 300FT. BUT A LOT OF IT'S EATEN UP BY THIS VERY LONG TAPER. SO IT'S HARD. WHAT HAPPENS IS IN OUR SORT OF TRAFFIC SPEED. SO IN THE THROUGH PORTION YOU CAN YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE TURN ARROWS ARE, THE LEFT TURN ARROWS, A CAR CAN STACK THERE AND IT DOESN'T INTERFERE WITH THE THROUGH LANE OF TRAFFIC. BUT WHEN YOU HAVE THESE VERY LONG TAPERS, WHICH IS YOU, WHAT HAPPENS IS, IS EVENTUALLY THE CARS ARE STICKING OUT IN THE THROUGH LANE. IT'S WHAT WE CALL SPILLBACK. AND SO WHAT, WHAT WE WOULD PLAN TO DO IS ACTUALLY MAKE THIS WHOLE TAPER LENGTH ACTUALLY A THROUGH PORTION OF THE TURN LANE. SO THEN WE COULD STACK ALL OF THOSE CARS IN THE, IN THE, IN THE LEFT TURN LANE. IN ADDITION, WE WERE GOING TO EXTEND THIS TURN LANE ANOTHER

[02:00:03]

75FT TO MORE THAN ACCOUNT FOR OUR PROJECT'S LEFT TURNING MOVEMENTS AS WELL. SO THAT WILL IMPROVE THE CONDITIONS HERE. SO THIS THIS IMPROVEMENT HERE DOES NOT IMPACT THE SIGNAL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT JUST WILL IMPROVE THE OVERALL OPERATIONS OUT THERE. THE QUESTION REGARDING THE SIGNAL AND WHEN YOU DO DRILLS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN YOU HAVE A COMMITMENT TO BUILD A SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT, YOU BUILD THE SIGNAL AND THEN YOU TURN IT OVER TO THE AGENCY THEY OWN AND OPERATE IT. SO KIAR COUNTY HAS OWNED AND OPERATED THIS SIGNAL FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. THEY. SOME OF THESE SIGNALS, THOUGH THE THE CITY WILL OPERATE THEM AND STUFF, WORK IN AGREEMENTS WITH. WHETHER IT'S WITH THE DOT OR THE COUNTY. BUT ONCE YOU PAY FOR THAT, YOU BASICALLY PAY FOR IT ONE TIME AND THEN. THEN FROM THERE, THEN THE AGENCY TAKES IT OVER. AND THAT'S WHAT HAD OCCURRED WHEN THEY BUILT THIS BACK IN THE 80S FOR THE PROJECT. SO THEY KIND OF MADE THAT COMMITMENT AND TOOK CARE OF IT.

THEY DON'T LIKE REBUILD A SIGNAL. EVERY TIME SOMETHING COMES UP PER SE, BUT THAT WILL BE THE IMPROVEMENT. WE WILL DO A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT FOR THAT. AND SO WE DO IDENTIFY SPECIFICALLY, AND MAYBE THAT'S A PART OF THIS TOO. WHILE YOUR STAFF WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE SOME SPECIFIC IDENTITY OF IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'LL MAKE HERE. SO THOSE THOSE ARE THE COMMITMENTS THAT WE WOULD MAKE TO IMPROVE THIS LANE. THERE'S A NARRATIVE AS WELL IN THE T I S THAT TALKS ABOUT INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS. SO THE PERMIT, OF COURSE, IS NOT YET BEEN OBTAINED. THAT WOULD BE CONTINGENT ON THE SITE PLAN. BUT THE IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS IS PART OF THE T I S IN NARRATIVE. AND IT DISCUSSES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED VERSUS WHAT WE'RE PROVIDING, WHICH WAS WHICH WAS DONE IN COORDINATION WITH CITY AND COUNTY STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE PROVIDING MORE THAN ADEQUATE TURN LANE LENGTH FOR THE SOUTHBOUND TRAFFIC. RIGHT. I THINK I'M LOOKING AT THAT. IT'S THE FUTURE 2027 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC. IT'S PAGE 16 OF YOUR PRESENTATION, MR. TREBLE, BUT THERE ARE IT'S VERY THIS IS YOUR EXPERTISE. SO YOU NEED TO WALK ME THROUGH AND UNDERSTANDING THE LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT IT SAYS FROM THE HMC. CONTROL DELAY IS USED FOR THE BASIS OF DETERMINING THE LEVEL OF SERVICE, RANGING FROM THE LEVEL OF SERVICE A TO F. I THINK THAT'S WHEN YOU SAID WE ARE AT AN E, NO, A, C A C A C A C WITH WITH A A 2027 WITH THE PROJECT IN THE PEAK PERIOD. LET ME SEE. AND WHAT IS THAT PEAK TIME? I DON'T SEE ANY OF THE INFORMATION WHAT YOU'RE CLASSIFYING AS PEAK PERIODS TIMES. OKAY. YES. LET ME SEE. YOU SAID YES. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A P WHAT WE CALL WE LOOK AT A PM PEAK PERIOD, WHICH WOULD BE TYPICALLY 4 TO 6 P.M. AND AM PEAK PERIOD IS 7 TO 9 A.M. AND SO IN THE ANALYSIS, LIKE THE TRAFFIC DATA WE COLLECTED, WE HAD COLLECTED IN FEBRUARY OF 2025 IS WHEN WE COLLECTED THAT DATA. AND WE PROVIDE THAT IN, IN OUR APPENDIX B, THE INTERSECTION TRAFFIC COUNTS THAT WE HAD. AND SO THAT'S USED THEN IN THAT ANALYSIS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ON, C H. O I DO SEE IT HERE. YOUR 7 TO 9 AND 4 TO 6. MY APOLOGIES MA'AM. NO NO PROBLEM. THAT THAT'S THE NORMAL AM AND PM PEAK. THAT'S KIND OF THE THE INDUSTRY STANDARD RIGHT? YES. BUT YOUR CHECK IN TIME NORMALLY IS 4:00.

CORRECT. FOR HOTEL AND MAYBE SOMEBODY ELSE IS BETTER TO ADDRESS THAT. SO THEIR PEAK TIME WOULD BE THREE FOUR. MR. CLAWSON JUST NODDED. 4 P.M. IS AN APPROXIMATE CHECK IN TIME.

IT WILL BE STAGGERED, BUT IT IS A STANDARDIZATION. WHAT IS DEFINED AS PM PEAK AND AM PEAK.

WE DON'T MAKE THAT UP AND IT'S NOT PROJECT SPECIFIC. THANK YOU. AND SO WE DO ADD OUR PMP COINCIDENT WITH THAT SAME 4 TO 6 P.M. WHEN WE RUN THE. SO WHEN YOU SAY THAT YOU'RE GOING.

THANK YOU FOR THESE IMPROVEMENTS ON GOODLETTE ROAD FOR THAT SOUTHBOUND LEFT HAND TURN LANE. SO ARE YOU ENCROACHING INTO THE MEDIAN BECAUSE WE CAN'T MAKE THE ROAD WIDER? CORRECT. SO WE'RE GOING TO JUST EXTEND BACK THE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE MEDIAN

[02:05:04]

ITSELF. SO THE MEDIAN HAS SUFFICIENT WIDTH. WHAT HAPPENS IS YOU GO TO THAT NARROWER SEPARATOR LIKE WHERE THE TURN ARROWS ARE, WHERE YOU SEE KIND OF THE CONCRETE TYPE CONDITIONS THAT WOULD JUST GO BE EXTENDED BACK THAT THAT FULL DISTANCE. AND THEN WE WOULD JUST HAVE WHAT I CALL A 50 FOOT TAPER. SO IT'S A MUCH SHORTER TAPER. BUT WHAT IT DOES IS IT ALLOWS MORE CARS TO GET IN THAT TURN LANE SO THEY DON'T INTERFERE WITH THE THROUGH MOVEMENTS ON GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD IS A KEY THING. SO IT HELPS WITH THE EFFICIENCY OF THE OPERATIONS.

SO DOES THAT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WILL GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO THAT NORTH GOODLETTE ROAD ENTRANCE. NO, NOT QUITE THAT FAR. IT'S PROBABLY I DON'T KNOW IF YOU SEE WHERE MY LITTLE RED DOT IS, I THINK, YES, I IF I HAVE THAT GUESSED PRETTY WELL. ARE YOU SAYING LIKE, HERE'S THE ENTRANCE TO THE CASTLE PLACE RIGHT THERE? YEAH. SO IT WOULDN'T GO QUITE BACK THAT FAR.

YEAH. BE BACK ABOUT ABOUT HERE I THINK. OKAY. BY GUESSTIMATE AND AGAIN WE NORMALLY YOU'RE AGAIN, WE MAKE THIS COMMITMENT TO DO THESE IMPROVEMENTS AND TYPICALLY YOUR, YOUR STAFF IS PART OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT WOULD, WOULD MAKE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE RIGHT OF WAY PERMITS ARE APPROVED, IMPROVED AND MADE AND IN PLACE PRIOR TO THE FIRST CEO FOR THE PROJECT IS A TYPICAL REQUIREMENT TO MAKE SURE. OKAY. YEP. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. CAN I GO BACK TO MR. MCLEAN? OH, YES. I'D BE VERY HAPPY. YES, MA'AM. I GUESS I LOST THE QUESTION YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT AIRPORT. YES. AND IS WHAT IS THE SPECIFIC DOCUMENT THAT YOU HAVE TO RECEIVE FROM THE N A A FOR THE, THE FLIGHT PATH? IT'S IT'S BASICALLY WE HOLD A MEETING WITH THEM THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE'RE NOT IN THEIR FLIGHT PATH. SO THERE'S NO DOCUMENT THAT WE HAVE TO RECEIVE FROM THEM. THE ONLY TIME WE RECEIVE A DOCUMENT FROM THEM IS IF THERE'S A CONFLICT WITH THEIR NOISE CONES OR THEIR FLIGHT PATH. FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN WE CAME IN FOR 750 GOODLETTE, WHICH WAS THE THE ONE BACK ON THE WATERWAY THERE, WHEN WE DID THE CONDO BUILDING, WE HAD MET WITH THEM AND OUR FAA APPLICATION FOR THE TOWER CRANE THAT WE WERE GOING TO PUT IN THERE. WE NEEDED A LETTER FROM THE FAA SAYING OUR TOWER ■CRANE WAS COMPATIBLE, BUT AT THIS SITE, WE'RE FAR ENOUGH AWAY THAT WE'LL STILL HAVE TO DO AN FAA PERMIT FOR THE TOWER CRANE WHEN WE'RE BUILDING THE BUILDING, BUT THERE'S NO OTHER IMPACT. WE DID MEET WITH THE FAA AND THERE WAS NO OBJECTIONS TO THE BUILDING FROM THEM. OKAY.

FOR THE EXACT HEIGHT THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE BUILDING AT IS 80FT, EIGHT INCHES, I'M SORRY, 80FT, EIGHT INCHES. OKAY. AND THE YOU REFERENCED, DID YOU REFERENCE JUST NOW? I'M SORRY.

I WENT INTO MY HEAD THE RESIDENTIAL AREA ON THE WATER. THAT'S THE ONE THAT WAS BACK THERE. 750. GOOD. I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT IT IN A COUPLE YEARS. I IT'S IN THAT SAME NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S WE'RE SIX OVER TWO. IT'S SIX OVER ONE. SO IT'S A STORY SHORTER, BUT I THINK IT HAD IT DIDN'T REQUIRE IS WHAT YOU WERE SAYING. OH NO MA'AM. OKAY. NO, THE ONLY THE ONLY REQUIREMENT THERE. AND IT'S IT'S ESSENTIALLY THE SAME REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU'RE SEEING NOW FOR ANY OF THE TOWER CRANES YOU SEE IN NAPLES NOW, LIKE AT THE HOSPITAL, THEY ALL HAVE TO HAVE FAA PERMITS TO PUT THOSE TOWER CRANES UP ANYWAY. YEAH, I I'M JUST REFERRING TO THE FLIGHT PATH. AND SO YEAH, THERE'S NO FLIGHT PATH CONFLICTS WITH OUR PROJECT. NO, MA'AM. OKAY. THANK YOU. MAYOR. THERE IS ALSO A LETTER FROM THE NA. YES. ESSENTIALLY STATING THAT IN OUR. YES. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO VERIFY WITH HIM. STORMWATER. THERE'S A STORM, MR. ROTH. THE STORMWATER PIECE THAT'S IN THERE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'VE HAD SOME ISSUES WITH AREAS OF STORMWATER. WHAT WHAT WHAT KIND OF A STORAGE WATER STORAGE AREA IS THAT? ARE WE SPEAKING THIS PROPERTY SPECIFIC? ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE COMMONS OVERALL? NO, I THOUGHT IT ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. YOU IDENTIFIED A WATER. YES. SO ON THIS SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTED HERE WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BEING PROVIDED. THERE'S THREE OPEN DRY RETENTION AREAS. AND THEN THERE'S ALSO PERMEABLE PAVER SYSTEM. THEY'RE ALL INTERCONNECTED. WE'LL EQUALIZE. THEY STORE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF WATER UP TO A CERTAIN ELEVATION. AND THEN WHEN IT REACHES THAT ELEVATION, IT SPILLS OVER INTO THE LAKE WHERE THE REMAINDER OF THE WATER QUALITY AND WATER QUANTITY IS STORED WITHIN THIS OVERALL LAKE THAT SERVES WITHIN THIS MASTER ERP. ULTIMATELY, THIS LAKE OUTFALLS TO THIS

[02:10:01]

BASICALLY SLOUGH THROUGH THE MANGROVES. THERE'S A SPREADER SWALE IN HERE BEFORE THAT GETS INTO THE GORDON RIVER. SO THAT'S THE KIND OF TREATMENT TERRAIN I WAS REFERRING TO EARLIER. WE'VE GOT DRY RETENTION AREAS, PERMEABLE PAVERS, THEN INTO THE LAKE, THEN INTO A SPREADER SWALE, THEN SO ON YOUR DRAWINGS, CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT DRAWING SHOWS THAT? YEAH, THE MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN FOR THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. CAN YOU JUST PULL THAT UP? SURE. BECAUSE YOU KEEP REFERRING TO THE SLIDES THAT WE DON'T, IT'LL BE IN YOUR CIVIL SET, RIGHT? YEAH. OUR CIVIL ENGINEERING SET. BUT I CAN SHOW YOU HERE ON THE SCREEN AS WELL. SO JUST SAVING TIME. HAVE YOU DISCUSSED THE POTENTIAL OF YOUR THE UTILITIES CONNECTING WITH OUR SYSTEM AND NOT HAVING TO DRAIN INTO AN IMPAIRED BODY, WATER, WATER BODY? HAVE WE DISCUSSED. YES. WITH THE STATE WE'RE IN FOR PERMANENT MODIFICATION WITH SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, AND THIS LAND WAS ALL ORIGINALLY CONTEMPLATED TO BE WITHIN THE SAME STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. WE'RE PROVIDING 50% ADDITIONAL STORMWATER QUALITY BECAUSE OF THE IMPAIRED WATER BODY FOR DISSOLVED OXYGEN IN THE JORDAN RIVER. THOSE THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREAS ARE, AS WE WERE DISCUSSING EARLIER, I'LL SHOW YOU ON THE SCREEN. HERE'S A DRY DETENTION AREA HERE. SORRY, RETENTION IS DRY RETENTION AREA HERE UP TO THE NORTHEAST. AND THEN THERE'S ONE KIND OF IN THE CENTER OF THE DRIVES HERE. AND THEN WE HAVE THE PERMEABLE PAVER SYSTEM ALL UNDERNEATH THE DRIVES HERE IN THE PARKING SPACES. SO THIS THE THERE'S THE ONSITE STORMWATER QUALITY, WHICH IS IN THE FORM OF PRETREATMENT. SO IT'S PRE-TREATING HERE ON SITE. THEN IT GOES INTO THE LAKE THAT'S IN THE CENTER OF THE COMMONS AND THE MASTER STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, THEN INTO THE SPREADER SWALE AND THEN INTO THE GORDON RIVER. SO THIS IS ALL, YOU KNOW, WORKED OUT WITH THE STATE BACK IN THE EARLY 80S. WE'RE JUST FILING THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS MODIFICATION. NOW, AS MENTIONED EARLIER, WE'RE THROUGH ONE ROUND OF REVIEW AND ARE READY TO MAKE OUR SECOND SUBMITTAL TO THE STATE LIKELY THIS WEEK. WHAT SPECIFICALLY IS THAT MODIFICATION? SO THE MODIFICATION IS SHOWING YOU EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE GOING TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE ON SITE HERE. SO WE'RE SHOWING THEM THESE PLANS. WE'RE SHOWING THEM THE HOTEL THE ONSITE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND HOW THAT WORKS IN WITH WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY CONTEMPLATED IN THE MASTER PERMIT. DID I UNDERSTAND THEIR CRITERIA WAS MORE STRINGENT THAN OURS. WELL, IT'S DIFFERENT, BUT YEAH, IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE'RE DOING A HALF INCH OF PRETREATMENT OVER THE SITE, PLUS 50% ADDITIONAL VERSUS WHEN WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE CITY STANDARD HERE, IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT CALCULATION. YOU KNOW, HAVING MORE GREEN SPACE IS A BENEFIT IN THE CITY. YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF JUST HAVING THIS ALL AS A PARKING LOT, THERE'S SOME BENEFIT TO HAVING THE GREEN SPACE BECAUSE WE WANT THE WATER TO PERK INTO THE GROUND. THANK YOU. I HAVE TEN MINUTES. WAS IT ON? YEAH, IT WAS ON ON THAT STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. OKAY. ME TOO. YEAH, BOTH OF US. SO GO AHEAD. YEAH. THANKS FOR THE EXPLANATION OF THE STORMWATER FLOW. JUST A QUESTION. HAS THE WATER QUALITY IN THE LAKE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE COMMONS BEEN TESTED TO DETERMINE THAT IT'S OPERATING EFFECTIVELY? WE WOULD JUST HATE TO SEE THE PRETREATMENT PRETREATED WATER FROM THE HOTEL FLOW INTO A LAKE, WHERE IT'S BECOMES DIRTY AGAIN BEFORE IT GOES INTO THE GORDON RIVER. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S BEEN ANY. I BELIEVE THAT THE CITY HAS DONE SOME TESTING ON THE LAKE. WE DID RECEIVE SOME COMMUNICATION FROM THE CITY THAT THE OVERALL ASSOCIATION. THEY WANT THEM TO DO SOME ADDITIONAL TESTING AND MAINTENANCE ON THE LAKE, BUT FOR. FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, NOT SPECIFIC TO THIS PROPERTY, BUT WE ARE CLEANING THE WATER ON SITE, DOING THE PRETREATMENT BEFORE IT GOES INTO THAT LAKE. RIGHT? YEAH. I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IT GOES INTO THE LAKE BEFORE IT GOES TO THE GORDON RIVER, BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE GORDON RIVER IS IMPAIRED AND WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT WORSE. SO I'LL ASK STAFF WHEN IT'S THEIR TURN IF THEY HAVE AN. THAT'LL BE LATER. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. DON'T FORGET THAT YOU ANSWERED. YEAH. I WAS JUST SAYING THIS. THIS DISCUSSION DID COME UP IN A PREVIOUS REVIEW OF A PROJECT IN THE COMMENTS. SO I'M GOING TO GO BACK AND SEE IF I CAN FIND THAT.

[02:15:02]

I THINK WE'VE COVERED IT, BUT MY ONE AND ONLY CONCERN, QUITE FRANKLY, IS WE KNOW THAT THAT FLOODS RATHER EASILY. YOU KNOW, THE STORMWATER SYSTEM ALONG GOODLETTE FRANK IS ANTIQUATED.

IT TENDS TO FLOOD QUITE A BIT. SO I WOULD JUST APPRECIATE IT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO DWELL ON IT FOREVER, BUT EXACTLY WHAT THE RETENTION SYSTEM IS ON THE PROPERTY, YOU'VE GOT PER PAVERS HERE, PERVIOUS, PERVIOUS PAVERS, AND THERE IS RETENTION UNDERNEATH THE PAVERS. OKAY, SO I GUESS BACKING UP, STARTING ON GOODLETT. YEAH, THE STORMWATER SYSTEM ON GOODLETT IS SOMETHING SEPARATE AND INDEPENDENT OF WHAT? THE STORMWATER SYSTEM IN THE FISHERIES OF THE FLOODING THAT GOES ON ON GOODLETTE ROAD. TO SAY IT. WELL, WE'RE GOING TO WE HAVE TO HAVE A PERIMETER BERM AROUND THIS PROPERTY SO THAT IT IT BEHAVES INDEPENDENTLY FROM THE STORMWATER ON. GOOD. LET'S. WE HAVE MINIMUM PERIMETER BERM ELEVATIONS AS AS SET FORTH IN THE MASTER ERP SO THAT THEY'RE THEY'RE SEPARATE FROM ONE ANOTHER. THERE ARE TWO INDEPENDENTLY FUNCTIONING SYSTEMS. AN ON SITE. WE HAVE THESE OPEN DRY RETENTION AREAS.

WE'VE GOT ONE HERE. THERE'S ONE OVER HERE IN THE CENTER OF THE DRIVEWAYS. AND THEN YOU GOT THE ONE IN THE NORTHEAST THERE, TRADITIONAL DETENTION AREAS. THEN YOU HAVE THE THE AGGREGATE BASE OF THE PERMEABLE PAVER SYSTEM HERE. SO THERE'S WATER BEING STORED IN THE VOID VOLUME WITHIN THAT AGGREGATE BASE. SO THOSE PERMEABLE PAVERS, THE WATER HITS PERMEABLE PAVERS.

IT'S PERKING THROUGH GOING INTO THE AGGREGATE BASE BENEATH. AND THEN THERE'S WATER STORED WITHIN THAT AGGREGATE BASE. THEN IT PERKS INTO THE GROUND. WE HAVE PRETTY GOOD INFILTRATION RATES HERE. WE DID DOUBLE RING INFILTRATION TESTS, PARKING ANYWHERE BETWEEN 2.8 AND 3.5 INCHES PER HOUR. AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A SYSTEM OF UNDERDRAINS UNDERNEATH THAT AGGREGATE BASE UNDER THE PERMEABLE PAVERS HERE, SO THAT ALL EQUALIZES AND TIES IN WITH THE DRY, DRY RETENTION. I GET IT. AND THEN YOU'VE GOT THIS STRUCTURE HERE. THAT'S OUR CONTROL STRUCTURE. SO IT'S AN ELEVATED STRUCTURE IN THAT DETENTION AREA. SO ONCE THAT REQUISITE VOLUME IS ACHIEVED IN THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, THEN IT WILL OVERFLOW THROUGH THAT GRADE INTO THE REMAINDER OF THE SYSTEM AND INTO THAT INTO THE LAKE, INTO THE LAKE. YEAH, INTO THE LAKE. JUST ACROSS THE ROAD. HERE IS THE LAKE. YEP. OKAY. THANKS.

THAT'S A BIG HELP. SURE. YOU WANT ME TO? THANKS. JUST FOR CLARITY FOR ME. DO YOU ALL ARE YOU ALL RESPONSIBLE FOR THE LAKE IN THE COMMENTS? THE ASSOCIATION IS RIGHT. AND THEN WHAT IS WHAT? WATER TREATMENT TODAY. IF WE COULD JUST PAUSE TODAY. WHAT WATER TREATMENT PROGRAM IS ON THE LOT RIGHT NOW? THERE'S NO STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. THERE'S NOTHING. YEP. AND I COULD PULL A FLATS BOAT ACROSS IT. SO NOT ONLY ARE YOU IMPROVING IT, YOU'RE IMPROVING IT 50% MORE THAN CODE REQUIRES. THERE'S A 50% ADDITIONAL WATER QUALITY PROVIDED BECAUSE OF THE GORDON RIVER BEING IMPAIRED WATER BODY THAT'S IMPOSED BY THE STATE GOT IT IMPOSED BY THE STATE. CORRECT. AND YOU'RE COMPLYING? YEAH, WE'RE COMPLYING WITH THAT.

THAT'S GREAT. THANKS. THANK YOU. I GOT CLARIFICATION, CARL. YEAH. IT'S KIND OF AN ECO SENSITIVE AREA WITH THE GORDON RIVER SO CLOSE AND THE MANGROVES AND WHATNOT. IS THERE ANY IS A TRANSIENT FACILITY? YOU KNOW, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT MAYBE STUFF COMING OUT OF THEIR CARS ON THE PARKING LOT AND STUFF LIKE THAT. IS THERE ANY CATCH ITEMS IN THE IN THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM THAT'S DESIGNED THERE, THAT THAT KIND OF FILTER OR CATCH ANY KIND OF DEBRIS THAT'S COMING FROM CARS? WELL, THAT'S WHAT THIS PRETREATMENT IS FOR. SO THIS, THIS PRETREATMENT SYSTEM IS INTENDED TO ACCOMMODATE THIS COMMERCIAL USE ON THIS SITE. SO IF IT WAS A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THEN WE WOULDN'T BE REQUIRED TO DO THE PRETREATMENT UNLESS IT'S SPECIFICALLY SET FORTH IN THE MASTER ERP. SO I'M TALKING ABOUT BASICALLY MAYBE SOME GARBAGE, YOU KNOW, STUFF LIKE THAT. THAT'S, YOU KNOW, HAVE YOU TRAVELED A LOT? YOU'VE SEEN THIS IN SOME, SOME HOTELS. THAT STUFF COMES OUT OF CARS AND PEOPLE ARE IN A HURRY. AND YEAH.

WELL, WHEN THE WATER, LET'S SAY THE, THE RUNOFF FROM THE PARKING LOT GOES INTO A CATCH BASIN, THERE'S SUMPS IN THE CATCH BASIN THAT ARE BENEATH THE INVERTED THE STORM PIPE. SO THAT CAPTURES ANY SEDIMENT, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING HEAVY THAT FALLS INTO THOSE CATCH BASINS. AND THEN THOSE HAVE TO BE MAINTAINED. AND THEN THOSE ARE CLEANED ON A REGULAR BASIS WITH A VACUUM TRUCK. AND SO WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES PER THE SOUTH

[02:20:04]

FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ERP FOR THE ONSITE STORMWATER SYSTEM. SO YES, THERE'S BUT ALL THIS ONSITE TREATMENT IS INTENDED TO TAKE CARE OF THE COMMERCIAL USE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED HERE. AND THE UNDERGROUND STORAGE UNDER THE PAVER IS THAT JUST LIKE CORAL STONE, YOU KNOW, LAYER OF CORAL STONE. THAT'S. YEAH. THE BEST WAY TO. IT'S IT'S THREE DIFFERENT SIZES OF AGGREGATE. SO THE BEST WAY TO DESCRIBE IT IS THE BASE COURSE IS KIND OF LIKE COBBLES. AND THEN YOU GO TO A GRAVEL OR 57 STONE IN THE MIDDLE. AND THEN ON TOP IS THE 89 STONE, WHICH IS LIKE A PEA GRAVEL. AND THEY ALL CHOKE EACH OTHER OFF BECAUSE OF THE SIZE OF THE AGGREGATE IN THE DIFFERENT LAYERS. IT'S MEANING. SO THE THE 89 STONE WON'T MIGRATE INTO THE 57 ZONE AND THEREFORE WON'T TAKE UP THE VOID SPACE THAT IS THERE. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. THAT NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONER AND PETITIONER'S AGENT, BUT IT IS 1055. WE ARE DUE FOR A AT LEAST 5 TO 10 MINUTE BREAK. SO K IN FROM OUR BREAK AND CONTINUING ON WITH ITEM 12 A, WE HAVE FINISHED THE PETITIONER'S AND. PRESENTATION AND QUESTIONS AND WE'RE HOPEFULLY WE'LL MOVE MUCH FASTER. NOW WE'VE GOT THE STAFF REPORT. BEFORE WE START WITH THE STAFF REPORT, ERICA. MISS MARTIN, THERE IS A POWERPOINT THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED BY THE PETITIONER, WHICH IS NOT PART OF OUR PACKET. HAVE YOU REVIEWED THAT? AND AND FOR ITS ACCURACY TO THE DOCUMENTATION OF THE. SO COUNCIL NORMALLY THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED IN WITH. IT WAS. OKAY. YEAH, THEY DID SUBMIT IT AND WE DID REVIEW IT, BUT WE AS COUNCIL DID NOT RECEIVE THAT. SO WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE THAT WE ACCEPTED INTO THE RECORD THAT IT'S BEEN VERIFIED BY BY THE STAFF. DO THAT NOW OR. YES, YOU NEED A MOTION. I DON'T DO WE NEED A MOTION FOR THAT. IS IT NOT IN THE RECORD. IT'S NOT IN OUR. I MEAN, IF THEY TECHNICALLY IF THEY'VE SHOWN IT HERE AT THE HEARING, IT'S PART OF THE RECORD AND THE CLERK SHOULD COLLECT IT. YEAH. IT SHOULD BE PART OF THE THE OFFICIAL RECORD FOR THE QUASI JUDICIAL PART. YOU DON'T HAVE TO VOTE ON IT. WELL, UNLESS YOU HAVE SPECIAL RULES THAT I DON'T KNOW ABOUT. WE'VE DISCUSSED IT IN THE PAST THAT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED AND COUNCIL SHOULD RECEIVE IT BECAUSE THE PETITIONER IS REFERRING TO IT AND COUNCIL DOESN'T HAVE IT, WE ONLY HAVE THE IT'S A POWERPOINT. OKAY. YEAH. I MEAN, IT IS A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING. AND IF YOU WANT TO BE MORE JUDICIAL THAN QUASI JUDICIAL AND YOU WANT TO VOTE ON VOTE ON SPECIFIC THINGS TO BRING INTO THE ITEM, EVEN THE PUBLIC, THAT IF THEY, THE PUBLIC COMES FORWARD AND PRESENTS SOMETHING TECHNICALLY THAT SHOULD BE IN THE RECORD AS WELL. YEAH. I DON'T I'M NOT SAYING WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE. IT'S BEEN A PRACTICE OF THE PAST THAT IF IT WASN'T THAT, THE COUNCIL WOULD JUST ACCEPT IT INTO THEIR RECORD. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT PRACTICE. SORRY. I'M OKAY WITH ACCEPTING THE RECORD. YES. SURE. SCHULZ.

YES. YES, YES. THANK YOU. PERFECT. NOW, MISS MARTIN, YOUR STAFF REPORT STILL. GOOD MORNING. ERICA MARTIN, PLANNING DIRECTOR. YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY A SITE PLAN. THIS IS SITE PLAN PETITION 25 DASH SP ONE. THIS IS FOR A HOTEL AT 870 GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. THE PETITIONER WENT THROUGH A VERY LONG DESCRIPTION OF THE HISTORY. I WILL TOUCH ON THAT MUCH MORE BRIEFLY AS AS YOU WERE AWARE, THE COMMONS PROFESSIONAL PARK DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT AND ITS RELATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE WERE ADOPTED BY COLLIER COUNTY. THIS WAS IN 1980. THE. SUBSEQUENTLY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY OF NAPLES. IN 1989, WE ANNEXED THE WHOLE 52 ACRE PROPERTY INTO THE CITY. AS PART OF THE ANNEXATION, THE CITY APPROVED A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT REQUIRED ADOPTION OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT ORDER. WE DID NOT COMPLETE THAT STEP UNTIL 2017, BUT THAT DEVELOPMENT ORDER 2017 DASH D01 AND RESOLUTION 2017 13959. THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER INCLUDED NINE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT RECOGNIZE THE ORIGINAL APPROVALS, CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS OF DRY DEVELOPMENT ORDER 81, AS WELL AS SETTING A 15 YEAR MAXIMUM BUILD OUT DATE FROM ADOPTION AND A MAXIMUM TRIP GENERATION FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT OF 1545. UNADJUSTED TWO WAY P M WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRIPS SINCE 1980, ALL

[02:25:02]

DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE COMMONS PROFESSIONAL PARK HAS EITHER BEEN REVIEWED BY COLLIER COUNTY OR THE CITY OF NAPLES. UNDER THE LIMITS AND APPROVALS PROVIDED BY DRE DEVELOPMENT ORDER 81 AND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WAS PUD ORDINANCE 80 DASH 42. TO DATE, APPROXIMATELY 203,459FT■!S OF TE APPROVED 693,000FT■!S OF OFFICE AND RELATED USES HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTED, NONE OF THE 15,000FT■!S OF RETAIL HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED. THE PROPOSED HOTEL WILL INCLUDE APPROXIMATELY 188,039 GROSS SQUARE FEET, LEAVING APPROXIMATELY 301,502FT■!S OF OFFICE AND RELATED USES TO BE ALLOCATED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT.

ADDITIONALLY, THE ORIGINAL D, R, I AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ALLOWED FOR 100 RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THE CITY HAS APPROVED THE ALLOCATION OF ALL OF THOSE. ONE PROJECT 710 GOODLETTE WITH 63, AND THEN THE REMAINING 37 UNITS WERE APPROVED AT 750. I WILL TOUCH REALLY QUICKLY.

THERE WAS A DISCUSSION HERE ABOUT THE WATER QUALITY TESTING OF THE LAKE I CAN PROVIDE TO CITY COUNCIL. THERE IS, AS PART OF THE RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT AT 750, WHICH IS THE RESIDENTIAL PROJECT ON THE WATER. THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT THAT THEY DO WATER QUALITY TESTING TO CONFIRM THAT THE WATER QUALITY OF THAT LAKE IS SUFFICIENT AS PART OF THEIR PERMITTING PROCESS. SO I WILL SEE IF WE HAVE RECEIVED THAT AS OF YET, BUT THAT HAS BEEN A CONCERN OF THE CITY AND IT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED PRIOR. THIS PROJECT, THE HOTEL PROJECT THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY DID GO TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IN JANUARY OF 2025. AT THAT TIME, IT WAS A DIFFERENT DESIGN THAT INCLUDED A ROOFTOP RESTAURANT AND BAR. THERE WAS EXTENSIVE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT. WE HAD A NUMBER OF THE LAKE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD MEMBERS ATTEND THAT MEETING. FOLLOWING THAT MEETING, THE PETITIONER DID GO BACK, MET WITH THE LAKE PARK COMMUNITY AND AMENDED THE DESIGN. THEY CAME BACK TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IN APRIL OF 2025 WITH A REVISED DESIGN REMOVING THE ROOFTOP RESTAURANT. THEY ALSO ENHANCE THE PARK LIKE AREA AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY. AND BY FRONT I MEAN THE THE WESTERN FACING PORTION ABUTTING GOODLETTE FRANK, INCREASING THE GREEN SPACE AND PLANTING IN THAT LOCATION. THIS IS AN INTERESTING SITUATION HERE IN WITH RESPECT TO PARKING, YOU HAVE A PARKING REQUIREMENT IN YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT WHEN UTILIZING THAT CALCULATION, YOU'D BE REQUIRED.

THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE 285 SPACES. THIS IS A 290 UNIT HOTEL. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT ACTUALLY REQUIRES IN THE DOWNTOWN MIXED USE FUTURE LAND USE WHERE THIS IS LOCATED, A HIGHER PARKING STANDARD. SO THEY'RE REQUIRED BY THE COMP PLAN TO PROVIDE 290 SPACES. AND THEY ARE. SO THEY'RE MEETING THAT THAT REQUIREMENT. WE DID SEND PUBLIC NOTIFICATION TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1000FT.

WE'VE INCLUDED CORRESPONDENCE IN YOUR PACKET. WE ALSO STAFF DID REVIEW THIS AGAINST THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND BY STAFF. IN THIS CASE THIS IS A SITE PLAN. SO THIS WAS DISTRIBUTED TO ALL DEPARTMENTS IN THE CITY. AS PART OF THAT SITE PLAN APPROVAL. WE DID INCLUDE IN THE THE PLANNING THE STAFF REPORT. SO IN YOUR PACKET THAT IS LABELED AS STAFF REPORT. THE STAFF REPORT DOES INCLUDE ALL OF THE COMMENTS THAT WERE RECEIVED BY THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS IN THAT SITE PLAN REVIEW SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THEM AND ANY OUTSTANDING CONDITIONS OR ONGOING CONDITIONS ARE INCLUDED IN YOUR RESOLUTION. AS THE STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS IN THAT RESOLUTION.

BUT STAFF DID. SORRY, STAFF DID REVIEW THIS AGAINST THE BOTH THE SITE PLAN CRITERIA IN CHAPTER 46 OF YOUR CODE AND THE RESIDENTIAL IMPACT CRITERIA. STAFF'S ANALYSIS IS INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT, WHICH I WOULD ASK TO INCORPORATE INTO THE RECORD IN LIEU OF READING ALL OF THOSE. AND WE DID FIND THAT THE REQUEST IS SUFFICIENT AND CONSISTENT WITH THOSE CRITERIA.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE INCLUSION OF FOUR CONDITIONS. THOSE FOUR CONDITIONS WOULD BE ONE. THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS HAS BEEN COORDINATED WITH AND APPROVED BY COLLIER COUNTY. AS PART OF THE COMMITMENTS, THE PETITIONER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING ASSOCIATED COSTS, TO EXTEND THE TOTAL LENGTH OF THE SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE ON GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. WE'VE HAD EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT. THE SECOND IS THE SIDEWALK ALONG GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD SHALL BE EIGHT FEET AS IDENTIFIED ON THE SUBMITTED PLANS, AND SHALL BE PERMITTED APPROPRIATELY WITH COLLIER COUNTY. YOU WILL SEE TWO. THIS WAS A TOPIC OF GREAT DISCUSSION AT THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD. YOU'LL SEE IN YOUR PLANS THERE ARE TWO SIDEWALKS. HERE. YOU HAVE THE SIDEWALK THAT WAS. THAT IS PART OF, YOU KNOW,

[02:30:01]

IMMEDIATELY ABUTTING GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. YOU ALSO HAVE THE SIDEWALK THAT IS PROPOSED ON THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY. SO IT'S THE MEANDERING WALKWAY. SO YOU HAVE TWO, TWO SIDEWALK OPPORTUNITIES HERE. THE THIRD CONDITION RECOMMENDED IS THE SIDEWALK ALONG GOODLETTE ROAD WITHIN THE COMMONS. RIGHT OF WAY SHALL BE FURTHER EVALUATED. SO GOODLETTE ROAD, NOT GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD. A LOT OF CONFUSION THERE. I FULLY SUPPORT THIS PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE NAME OF GOODLETTE ROAD TO SEVENTH AVENUE NORTH. THIS HAS BEEN NOTHING BUT CONFUSING, BUT THE SIDEWALK ALONG GOODLETTE ROAD WITHIN THE COMMONS RIGHT OF WAY SHALL BE FURTHER EVALUATED. PREFERABLE ADJUSTMENTS SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM TWO FEET SEPARATION FROM THE ROADWAY FOR PROTECTION AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC. THIS CAN BE HANDLED DURING THE BUILDING PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS AND THE. THE CITY SHALL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE BRICK PAVER SIDEWALK. SO ANYTIME WE INCORPORATE BRICK PAVERS INTO A PROJECT, THE CITY DOES NOT WANT TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT MAINTENANCE. THERE'S A MUCH HIGHER MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENT FOR PAVERS THAN FOR ASPHALT OR PAVEMENT. SO THE NUMBER FOUR IS THE GREENBELT SECTION OF THE CORRIDOR. MANAGEMENT OVERLAY REQUIRES STREET FRONTAGE LANDSCAPING ALONG GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD TO INCLUDE PINE TREES AND CANOPY TREES, INCLUDING OAK, BLACK OLIVE, HONG KONG ORCHIDS AND GOLDEN RAIN TREES PLANTED IN MASSES EVERY 30FT. THE PETITIONER PROPOSES TO PRESERVE THE EXISTING MATURE MAHOGANY TREES AND SUPPLEMENT THE FRONTAGE WITH ADDITIONAL PLANTING. THIS WILL REQUIRE REVIEW AND APPROVAL FROM THE CITY'S ARBORIST AND WILL BE REVIEWED BY THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AT FINAL DESIGN. THEY HAVE A NUMBER OF VERY MATURE, HEALTHY MAHOGANY TREES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR A LONG TIME AND IN LIEU OF TEARING THOSE OUT TO REPLACE WITH THE DESIGNATED STREET TREES, THAT WOULD BE MUCH SMALLER AND TAKE A LONG TIME TO REACH THAT MATURITY. THEY'RE PROPOSING TO MAINTAIN WHAT THEY HAVE. I DO HAVE I RECEIVED THIS MORNING AN EMAIL FROM THE CITY'S ARBORIST CONFIRMING HER APPROVAL TO MAINTAIN THOSE EXISTING MATURE TREES. SO THAT'S WHAT'S REFLECTED ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS THAT YOU HAVE. AND IF IF COUNCIL AGREES, THAT'S WHAT WILL GO BEFORE THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD. THERE ARE, OF COURSE, SUPPLEMENTING. THEY'RE NOT JUST RELYING ON THOSE MATURE TREES. YOU CAN SEE IN THE LANDSCAPE SET OF PLANS.

IT'S A VERY ROBUST SET OF LANDSCAPE PLANS IN THAT AREA. SPECIFICALLY, THIS PROJECT WAS REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD, THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST TO CITY COUNCIL. I BELIEVE IT WAS SIX. YEP. THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD VOTED 6 TO 0 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION. THE FOUR CONDITIONS THAT THEY RECOMMENDED ARE THE FOUR CONDITIONS I JUST READ TO YOU AND ARE INCLUDED IN YOUR RESOLUTION. I BELIEVE THE PETITIONER HAD INDICATED IN THEIR PRESENTATION THAT THEY WERE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE FOUR CONDITIONS THAT WERE BEFORE YOU TODAY, AND I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE FOUR RECOMMENDATIONS WERE FROM PA, FROM PAB. IT'S A COMBINATION OF RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AND THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD. OKAY.

AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR MAKING THAT CLARIFICATION ON THE RESOLUTION FOR THE RESPONSIBLE MAINTENANCE OF THE BRICK PAVER SIDEWALK. IT'S APPRECIATED. AND. I DO HAVE JUST. DO YOU WHEN WILL THE LANDSCAPING AND SIGNAGE BE DISCUSSED? SO YOU HAVE A LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE PACKET THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY, WHICH WE HEARD. YEP. SO THAT IS PART OF THE SITE PLAN. THIS IS THAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY. IT'S A PLAN THAT IS REFERENCED IN YOUR RESOLUTION. SO IF YOU I DIDN'T MEAN LANDSCAPING, I MEANT LIGHTING.

OH, SORRY. YOU ALSO HAVE THE ARCHITECTURAL PLAN IN YOUR PACKET TODAY. THAT ARCHITECTURAL PLAN, THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS DO DEPICT SIGNAGE AND LIGHTING. I THINK THEY SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED. I WILL TELL YOU THE PAGE NUMBER AS SOON AS I CAN. THEY SPECIFICALLY INCLUDED A LIGHTING RENDERING IN THIS IN THEIR SET FOR YOU TO SEE. OH, IT MIGHT HAVE JUST BEEN IN THE PRESENTATION. YEP. JUST IN THE PRESENTATION. TYPICALLY THOSE ARE REVIEWED AT FINAL DESIGN REVIEW, RIGHT? SO COUNCIL DOESN'T NORMALLY REVIEW THE LIGHTING AND THE SIGNAGE. CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO THE SIGNAGE IS NOT IN THIS EITHER.

SIGNAGE IS THEY THEY MAY SHOW SOME SIGNS ON THEIR ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS. I CAN'T. PLANS TO LOAD, BUT NO WE DON'T TYPICALLY NO COUNCIL DOES NOT REVIEW UNLESS THEY'RE ASKING FOR SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T MEET CODE. AND THEN THEY WOULD REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL. BUT. OKAY. COUNCIL QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. YES. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ, A COUPLE OF ITEMS AND COMMENTS. THIS ALL PREDATED MY EXPERIENCE HERE. SO IS IT NOT DE FACTO THIS HAS TO BE BUILT. WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A CHOICE BASED ON PRIOR COURT ACTIONS. AND SO THIS WHAT WE'RE

[02:35:01]

GOING THROUGH IS SORT OF A FAIT ACCOMPLI THAT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THIS. THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THIS AT THIS LOCATION. AND THEY HAVE VESTED RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO THOSE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT WERE APPROVED IN THE ORIGINAL DRA. RIGHT. AND I SEE WHAT IS AAM HOTELS. ARE THEY PART OF A CHAIN OF A BIGGER GROUP. I'M A GUY I GOT 2 MILLION POINTS. I'M WITH MARRIOTT SO I WHAT IS AAM HOTELS. IF IF MR. CLAWSON CAN RESPOND TO THAT QUESTION BRIEFLY IT PROBABLY ISN'T ISN'T APPROPRIATE FOR MISS MARTIN TO. THIS IS A REPRESENTATIVE WITH AAM HOTELS TO TALK ABOUT THE GROUP. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. HI GOOD MORNING CHRIS CLAWSON NAPLES FLORIDA. I'VE LIVED HERE A LONG TIME. I WORK FOR A COMPANY BASED OUT OF BOSTON AREA CALLED AAM MANAGEMENT. THE ENTITY IT'S A LLC THAT WAS CREATED FOR THIS HOTEL. AND YES WE DO OWN HOTELS IN THE NORTHEAST. WE OWN OTHER ASSETS AS WELL. APARTMENTS RETAIL RESTAURANTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO AND THE PRINCIPAL OF THE COMPANY JUST PURCHASED A HOME HERE IN NAPLES. THANKS. GOOD. GREAT. SO ABOUT HOW MANY HOTELS DO YOU OPERATE RIGHT NOW? I THINK WE OPERATE AROUND 15 HOTELS. WE HAVE ABOUT 1000 EMPLOYEES. THANK YOU. AND I WANT TO GIVE A COMPLIMENT TO M.H. I'VE NEVER MET THIS GENTLEMAN BEFORE IN MY LIFE, BUT I CAN'T GO PAST THE CONSTRUCTION SITE IN THIS CITY THAT DOESN'T HAVE MH K SIGN ON IT. SO WHATEVER YOU'VE DONE TO CORNER THE MARKET AS MUCH AS YOU HAVE, MY HAT'S OFF TO YOU AGAIN. WE'VE NEVER MET, NEVER SPOKEN WITH YOU AT ALL. I JUST KNOW IS MH K IS EVERYWHERE. I TURN AROUND. SO CONGRATULATIONS. SO MY, MY CONCERNS ARE JUST WE'RE JUST SORT OF STAMPING THIS AS IT WERE, BECAUSE IT HAS TO GO THERE. THEY'RE ENTITLED TO DO IT. THEY HAVE RULES TO FOLLOW AND WE'RE DOTTING THE I'S AND CROSSING THE T'S. AM I INCORRECT WITH THAT? I NOT WHEN IT COMES. AS MISS MARTIN STATED, TO THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLANS. BUT IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO TELL COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ THE AREAS FOR WHICH ARE NOT PART OF THAT, THAT COUNCIL IS TO REVIEW THE. THE REVIEW OR THE PETITION THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A SITE PLAN PETITION AND THE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN ARE PROVIDED IN YOUR CODE IN SECTION 46 DASH 33 G. SO THOSE ARE THE CRITERIA UNDER WHICH YOU ARE REVIEWING THIS THIS PROJECT. OKAY. THANK YOU.

BECAUSE I'VE GOT FOUR DOCTORS IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH OF THIS SITE. AND SO I WALK BY THERE. I WAS WONDERING WHAT THE DEVIL'S GOING UP THERE. AND NOW I KNOW I GET MY ARMS AROUND IT.

SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES, THIS WENT TO PB FOR APPROVAL, CORRECT. IT DID. YEAH. YES. PB FOR A WHILE. YEAH. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. THANK YOU. ERICA, CAN YOU GO IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL IN REFERENCE TO THE HEIGHT OF THIS BUILDING AND THE.

I'M GOING TO USE THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS, BUT THE HEIGHT RULES THAT ARE THAT ARE PART OF THIS PD AND HOW THIS IS THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IS CONFORMING WITH THOSE REQUIREMENTS. AGAIN, DO YOU MIND IF I CLICK THROUGH YOUR PRESENTATION TO THE. NEVER MIND, I CAN'T. I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S A, THERE'S THE ONE DIAGRAM THAT MARK HAD. YEAH. OR YOU CAN TELL US WHAT DOCUMENTS THAT ARE WITHIN THIS PACKET THAT IT MIGHT BE UNDER. I'M NOT SURE I FOUND IT ALSO. IF YOU HAVE THE DIAGRAM TO THE SITE PLAN. YEAH. ROLL YOUR OWN. I'LL ROLL MY OWN.

YOU GOT IT. SO THAT'S THE IMAGE ON THE LEFT. DOES THAT HELP? DO YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH IT? OH, YOU WANT THE ONE THAT SHE HAD IN HER PRESENTATION? YEP. YOU WANT THAT ONE? OKAY. THERE YOU GO. SO THAT'S TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM. THE DEVELOPMENT LANGUAGE RIGHT THERE. SO THAT'S THE PLAN. DEVELOPMENT ITSELF IS WHAT I ORIGINALLY APPROVED. THIS IS ORIGINAL APPROVAL LANGUAGE. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, AMENDED IN 2017. THE AMENDMENT OR THE, THE AFFIRMATION OR THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER IN 2017 DIDN'T CHANGE ANY OF THESE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. SO THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARD HERE IS WHAT YOU SEE ON THIS SCREEN AND WHAT IS HIGHLIGHTED HERE FOR THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT. THIS PROJECT IS REQUIRED. THIS PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. AND INSTEAD OF IT. I DID REVIEW THIS AND WE'LL GO ON A 6 TO 0 TO RECOMMEND

[02:40:11]

APPROVAL. YOU KNOW, SO DRB ACTUALLY REVIEWED THIS TWICE. THANK YOU. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

HOPEFULLY MY MY VOICE WAS CARRYING AND EVERYBODY HEARD ME, BUT GO AHEAD. THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD REVIEWED THIS ORIGINALLY IN JANUARY. THEY SINCE AMENDED THE DESIGN TO REMOVE THAT ROOFTOP ELEMENT. YOU'LL SEE NOW THE ROOFTOP IS PURELY MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT. THEY MADE SOME OTHER AMENDMENTS AS WELL IN RESPONSE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD INVOLVEMENT. AND THEN IT WAS BROUGHT BACK TO THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IN APRIL OF 2025. SO THEY REVIEWED THE DESIGN AND THEN IT WAS SUBSEQUENTLY STAFF REVIEWED FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT. AND APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU FOR THE CONTEXT. THANKS. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. BUT SO. IS THIS PROJECT AS DESIGNED? WELL, FIRST OF ALL, ARE THERE ANY DEVIATIONS FROM THE COMMENTS PD OR FROM CITY CODE WITH THIS PROJECT? THERE ARE NO THERE ARE NONE. AND I DON'T I MEAN, I MET WITH TALK TO YOU ABOUT WHY DID THEY COME? WHY ARE THEY HERE? DOES THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THE PD AND IT'S REQUIRED. THAT'S RIGHT. SO EVERYBODY KNOWS THE REASON THEY'RE HERE IS NOT BECAUSE IT'S A PD. IF IT WEREN'T FOR OF THAT BEING THE CASE, THEY'RE DOING EVERYTHING THAT THEY'RE ASKED TO DO. AND AND WE TALK ABOUT THAT IN 2017, THAT SLIDE GETTING AFFIRMED THAT YOU JUST SHOWED WHAT WAS GOING ON THAT THAT NEEDED TO BE AFFIRMED. OH 2017 SO THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL, THE ORIGINAL. SORRY, LET ME PULL THAT UP SPECIFICALLY FOR YOU. THE ORIGINAL WHEN WE ANNEXED IN, ANNEXED THIS DRY AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT INTO THE INTO THE CITY PART AS PART OF THE ANNEXATION AND PURSUANT TO THE FLORIDA STATUTES WE APPROVED, WE HAD WE WERE REQUIRED TO APPROVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THIS THAT DIDN'T, EVEN THOUGH THEY ANNEXED IT IN 1989, THAT WASN'T COMPLETED UNTIL 2017. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO GET TO. THAT'S HOW LONG IT TOOK TO GET THAT THING FINALIZED. AND IT'S FINALIZED. SO THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT BECAUSE THAT MAKES IT A MUCH EASIER PROCESS THAN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN TO DO THIS IN 2016. OKAY. THANK THANKS FOR THERE'S FOLKS FIRED UP OUTSIDE ABOUT SOMETHING. SORRY. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING FOR SIMPLIFYING THAT FOR ME.

COUNCIL. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF? I. THANK YOU AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS, BUT I HAVE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE. YOU KNOW, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO REVIEW THIS UNDER SECTION 46 DASH 33, AND STAFF HAS PROVIDED THEIR ANALYSIS. AND IT'S UP TO US TO SAY IF WE AGREE OR NOT, AND TO PROBE AND ASK QUESTIONS AND UNDERSTAND IT AND SAY IF WE AGREE OR OR NOT, AND WE HAVE SEVEN DIFFERENT PEOPLE PROBABLY HAVE SEVEN DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES ON ON SOME, SOME OF THEM ARE PRETTY OBJECTIVE. SOME OF THEM, TO ME ARE SUBJECTIVE. SO IT IS POSSIBLE WE MAY HAVE DIFFERENT JUDGMENTS ON ON SOME OF THE STANDARDS.

TRAFFIC TICKET IS HERE. IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS WHERE IT'S A COUNTY ROAD, GOODLETTE FRANK ROAD, A COUNTY ROAD, THE PETITIONER INTERACTED WITH THE COLLIER COUNTY PEOPLE APPROPRIATELY AND AND MADE THEIR ARRANGEMENTS WITH THE THE COUNTY ON THE TRAFFIC COMING IN AND GOING OUT. DOES THE CITY HAVE A ROLE IN THAT OR ARE WE JUST WE JUST ACCEPT. ARE WE REQUIRED TO ACCEPT WHAT THE COUNTY SAYS SINCE IT'S A COUNTY ROAD, OR DO YOU DO YOUR OWN ANALYSIS? ALLISON PICKETT FOR THE RECORD, I DO LOOK, I MEAN, I, I OBJECTIVELY LOOKED AS LOOK AS WELL AT THESE REVIEWS AND SEE WHAT KIND OF IMPACTS THAT MAY HAVE TO OUR SYSTEM.

GENERALLY, IF IT'S A, IT'S A COUNTY SYSTEM. I DO RELY ON THE THEM TO, TO EVALUATE IT. I DID PRESS BECAUSE I DID HAVE SOME CONCERNS WHEN THEY INITIALLY LOOKED AT IT AND REQUESTED FOR THEM TO LOOK A LITTLE BIT CLOSELY, A LITTLE BIT MORE CLOSELY, AND HAD RECOMMENDED IN PARTICULAR, THE EXTENSION OF THE SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE. OKAY, THAT'S FAIR. AND YOU'RE SATISFIED WITH YOUR PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT ON WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSED FOR THE SOUTHBOUND LEFT TURN? YES. I, I KNOW IN SPEAKING WITH THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER. MR. IS PART OF THIS. I REQUESTED THAT IT BE EXTENDED ABOVE AND BEYOND. I THINK THAT THERE'S ALREADY AN EXISTING EXISTING DEFICIENCY AND THAT LEFT TURN LANE, WHICH THEY REALLY SHOULD, YOU KNOW, IT TYPICALLY WOULDN'T BE RESPONSIBLE FOR AN EXISTING DEFICIENCY, BUT THEY DID AGREE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY EXTENDED IT TO TO ACCOUNT FOR THE EXISTING PLUS THE CONTRIBUTING

[02:45:09]

IMPACTS FROM THEIR DEVELOPMENT. ALL RIGHT. THANKS. AND THE EXPLANATION ON THE NORTHBOUND RIGHT TURN LANE, DO YOU HAVE CONCERNS WITH THAT? SO I DID LOOK AT AND I THINK PART OF THE JUDGMENT CALL ON THAT WAS BASED ON THE THE PEAK DIRECTION. IF YOU LOOK AT THE COLLIER COUNTY, OUR IS THE SOUTHBOUND DIRECTION. YOU MAY NOTICE THAT IF YOU DRIVE, I, I DRIVE WITH OUR OFFICE BEING RIGHT THERE, I DRIVE IT NORTH AND SOUTH THROUGHOUT THE DAY. I DO FEEL WHEN THOSE PEAK HOURS ARE. AND, AND I BELIEVE THAT I AM IN AGREEMENT THAT I. I DO FEEL THAT THE SOUTHBOUND DIRECTION, PARTICULARLY IT'S IN THAT SEGMENT IS BASICALLY WHERE IT'S IDENTIFIED IS THE CRITICAL LOCATION WHERE THERE IS A, WHERE THERE'S ALREADY REALLY A DEFICIENCY, BUT THAT'S WHERE THE PEAK DIRECTION IS. AND SO I THINK THAT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONSTRAINTS FOR THAT PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED, I DID LOOK AT THE THE IMPACTS FROM THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY. I MEAN, I THINK THAT WOULD BE AN ISSUE WHERE IT WOULD BE AN EMINENT DOMAIN THAT WOULD BE ON THE COUNTY IF THAT WAS THE CASE, TO PRESS FOR IT. BUT CONSIDERING THE IMPACTS AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THE SOUTHBOUND DIRECTION IS A PRIMARY PEAK DIRECTION, AND I DON'T THINK THAT RIGHT NOW DRIVING IT THAT I, I THINK THAT THERE'S AS MUCH OF AN ISSUE IS THE. MY MAIN CONCERN HAS BEEN THAT SOUTHBOUND LEFT.

SO. SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I FEEL LIKE IT IT THE JUDGMENT CALL, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD MAYBE CONTINUE TO MONITOR. I THINK AS PART. THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I DID BRING UP. BUT IT IT ULTIMATELY COMES DOWN TO THE COUNTY. I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO PRESS THEM TO SAY IF, IF THERE'S BECOMES A PROBLEM IN THE FUTURE, THAT THAT MAY NEED TO BE EVALUATED AND CONSIDERED AND, AND ALL. IF IF THERE'S A PROBLEM. OKAY. THANK YOU, MISS BAKER. SURE. AND THEN MISS MARTIN. THE CRITERIA 46 DASH 30 3G3. MAKE CERTAIN THAT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS COMPATIBLE WITH ITS SURROUNDING AREA. THE DESCRIPTION IN THE STAFF REPORT. THE WAY I READ IT SEEMED TO FOCUS ON THE COMMONS DEVELOPMENT ITSELF. DID YOU LOOK BEYOND THE COMMONS DEVELOPMENT, PARTICULARLY ACROSS GOODLETTE FRANK TO THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD? WE DID, AND I THINK WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT COMPATIBILITY, THERE ARE A LOT OF DIFFERENT FACTORS. YOU HAVE A SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD ON ONE SIDE AND THEN ON THE ON THE COMMONS ACROSS THE STREET, YOU HAVE A NOT ONLY A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, BUT A RELATIVELY INTENSE COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. DRI THAT WAS APPROVED WITH SPECIFIC HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS.

SO IN LOOKING AT COMPATIBILITY, YOU HAVE AND I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE AN AERIAL THAT SHOWS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN. BUT COMPATIBILITY IS NOT JUST A MEASURE OF HEIGHT IN THE SENSE YOU'RE. THE COMMONS WAS APPROVED. THE COMMONS WAS ANNEXED IN IN 1989. KNOWING WELL THAT THIS WAS GOING TO BE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT ALLOWED FOR THIS HEIGHT IN THIS LOCATION. SO I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE FAIR TO SAY, IN ORDER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD, WE WOULD HAVE A COMPARABLE HEIGHT. OTHERWISE, WE WOULDN'T HAVE ANNEXED A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT ALLOWED FOR SIX STORIES OVER TWO STORIES OF PARKING. I THINK AT THE TIME THAT THIS WAS ANNEXED IN, THE DECISION WAS MADE IN THE CITY THAT THIS IS A COMPATIBLE USE. THIS IS A COMPATIBLE DESIGN STANDARD FOR THIS LOCATION. NOW, WHAT THEY I THINK THEY'VE DONE TO ENHANCE COMPATIBILITY WITHIN THEIR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, AFFORDED IS THAT BUILDING IS, AND I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT, YOU KNOW, NUMBER OF LINEAR FEET, BUT IT'S 200FT PLUS FROM THEIR PROPERTY LINE. THEN YOU HAVE THE GOODLETTE. FRANK. RIGHT OF WAY, WHICH IS ONE OF THE LARGER RIGHT OF WAYS IN THE CITY. IT'S WHAT A SIX LANE, ALMOST SEVEN LANE IN THAT LOCATION. YOU HAVE THAT ENTIRE RIGHT OF WAY. AND THEN THERE'S EVEN ON THAT IN THAT PORTION OF LAKE PARK. ON THE OTHER SIDE, THERE'S A, THERE'S THAT STRIP OF LAND BETWEEN THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. SO I THINK ONE OF THE WAYS THEY'RE ACHIEVING THAT COMPATIBILITY IS PUSHING THAT BUILDING BACK AS FAR AS THEY CAN. THEY'VE ALSO I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE PARKING IN THE FRONT, BUT THEY'VE INCLUDED THAT PARK LIKE AREA, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST A RETENTION AREA, BUT THEY'VE LANDSCAPED IT. THEY'VE INCLUDED THE MEANDERING WALKWAY, THEY'VE, YOU KNOW, CREATED A LITTLE KIND OF NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY SPACE IN THE FRONT OF THAT BUILDING. SO I THINK THAT. ARE THE HEIGHTS ARE, ARE OBVIOUSLY VERY DIFFERENT IN THIS LOCATION. IT'D BE DIFFERENT IF THEY WERE ABUTTING RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER. BUT I THINK GIVEN THE DISTANCE FROM LAKE PARK AND THE FACT THAT

[02:50:01]

THIS, THIS IS WHAT IS ALLOWED IN THIS DISTRICT, THIS IS WHAT WAS APPROVED FOR THIS DISTRICT.

EVEN KNOWING THAT LAKE PARK WAS, YOU KNOW, THAT IT WAS A SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF GOODLETTE. SO I THINK THEY HAVE WITHIN THE VESTED RIGHTS THAT THEY HAVE AND WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT WERE APPROVED FOR THIS, THIS SITE, I THINK THEY'VE DONE WHAT THEY CAN TO MAKE THIS MORE COMPATIBLE. REMOVING THE ROOFTOP RESTAURANT, I THINK WAS A, WAS A GOOD OPTION. THEY'RE NOT NOT THAT I THINK THAT THE STATE OR THE COUNTY WOULD ALLOW THEM TO. THEY'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, ENTERING RIGHT OFF OF GOODLETTE. THEY'VE GOT THE ENTRANCE TO THIS OFF, YOU KNOW, OFF THE REAR. I THINK THEY'VE DONE THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT THEY HAVE DONE TO MAKE THIS MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. I JUST DON'T THINK YOU CAN LOOK AT THIS PURELY IN HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, BECAUSE THIS IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT ALLOWS FOR THAT HEIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT. YOU'VE BROUGHT A LOT MORE CONTEXT THAN I READ IN THE REPORT FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION. THANK YOU.

THANKS. I. MISS MARTIN. REAL QUICK QUESTION IN REFERENCE TO HEIGHT AGAIN AS WELL. AND ON THIS PAGE, WE'VE GOT THE DESCRIPTION OF SIX STOREYS OVER A MAXIMUM OF TWO PARKING LEVELS.

BUT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, THEY COULD HAVE HAD BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PARKING. I MEAN, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STORIES HERE, NOT HEIGHT IN FEET. THEY COULD HAVE HAD A TALLER BUILDING IN THIS SCENARIO WITH IF THEY HAD MADE THE INDIVIDUAL STORIES HIGHER.

THERE IS NOT A MAXIMUM NUMERICAL LIMITATION. SO IT'S A STORY WE. YEAH. SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE SHOULD BE COUNTING OUR BLESSINGS WITH THE WITH THE HEIGHT THAT WE GOT.

HEIGHT WAS THE ISSUE. I THINK THE THING. YEAH. WELL IT IS FOR US, BUT I THINK AS FAR AS THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, IT WAS PART OF THE AGREEMENT. I. JUST A QUESTION ON YOUR STAFF REPORT, MISS MARTIN, ON THE THE P D IS THAT ORDINANCE WITH THIS P D ATTACHED TO THE RESOLUTION WILL BE ATTACHED TO THE RESOLUTION. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE OFTEN ATTACH PRIOR ORDINANCES TO THE RESOLUTION IT'S REFERENCED IN THE WHEREAS CLAUSES. OKAY. AND THEN IT DOES SAY THAT THE APPROVAL AUTHORIZED 693,000FT■!S OF OFFICE, 15,000FT OF RETAIL USES AND 100 DWELLING UNITS. SO ARE THE DWELLING UNITS CONSIDERED TO BE THE TRANSIENT LODGING UNITS? NO. SO THE THERE ARE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, 100 RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS, MAXIMUM ALLOWED WITHIN THE ENTIRE COMMONS PLAN DEVELOPMENT. THEY HAVE ALL BEEN ALLOCATED. SO BETWEEN THE TWO DEVELOPMENTS AT 710 AND 750 THEY'VE BEEN ALLOCATED. THERE ARE NO MORE UNITS. THERE IS NOT A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF TRANSIENT LODGING UNITS. THERE'S NOT A CAP, A MAXIMUM IN THERE IN THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT. BUT IT DOES CONTRIBUTE TO THE COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWED. SO IT'S NOT A YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THAT THERE'S NO LIMITATION. IT'S JUST THAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOTEL, YOU KNOW, DRAWS ON THAT POOL OF ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE. AND THAT SQUARE FOOTAGE IS LISTED IN HERE SO THAT THE TOTAL P, D OR IS NOTICED. YES. AND THEN JUST LEGALLY FOR THE DOCUMENTS, THE SURVEY VERSUS THE I'LL GO TO OUR LEGAL COUNSEL ON THE PLAT VERSUS THE SURVEY. THE SURVEY THAT'S REFERENCED IN HERE IS WHAT DOCUMENT IS THAT EXHIBIT A IT'S IN YOUR PACKET LABELED AS SURVEY. AND IT'S BY. ALL RIGHT. I'M HAVING A HARD TIME FINDING.

DID YOU FIND IT, MR. DICKMAN? YEAH, IT'S ONE OF THE IT'S ONE OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE HYPERLINKED ON THE AGENDA. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THAT. OKAY. AND THAT'S EXHIBIT A BECAUSE THE ONE I GAVE YOU IS LISTED AS EXHIBIT A. JUST CLARIFYING. WELL, I'M LOOKING AT. THIS IS A SURVEY DONE BY COASTAL ENGINEERS CONSULTANTS, INC. YOU CAN ZOOM IN AND TELL YOU WHEN IT'S DATED, WHICH LOOKS LIKE IT'S I MEAN, YOU HANDED ME A PIECE OF PAPER. I'M NOT QUITE SURE WHERE IT CAME FROM. IT CAME FROM THE DOCUMENTATIONS I RECEIVED. OKAY.

AND THAT'S THE ONLY THING I HAVE THAT THAT RELATES TO A SURVEY. YES, BUT THERE'S A BOUNDARY SURVEY IN HERE. IT'S IN IT'S IT'S ON THE PUBLIC AGENDA HYPERLINK THERE. I'M

[02:55:05]

LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW. YES. I CAN GIVE YOU A HARD COPY. I JUST WANT IT. WHAT DO YOU WANT TO PUT IT ON THE SCREEN. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT EXHIBIT. WHAT EXHIBIT THAT IS. DAVID, COULD YOU PULL UP THE FILE THAT SAYS SURVEY? THANK YOU. OH, THANK YOU, MR. YOUNG. YEAH, RIGHT. IT IS STAMPED BY RICHARD J. EWING B P YEP. IT'S IN IT'S REFERENCED IN THE RESOLUTION UNDER SECTION TWO. THE BOUNDARY SURVEY PREPARED BY COASTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS DIGITALLY SIGNED. YES, I SEE THAT. I JUST DON'T I I'M UNCLEAR TO WHAT DOCUMENT I AM USING AS THE SURVEY TO. DO YOU SURVEY I IT'S DIFFERENT THAN MARY. YOU HANDED ME THE SHEET OF PAPER. IT'S DIFFERENT THAN THIS. YES. IT'S IT IT IS DIFFERENT IN THE PACKET. SO WHICH ONE ARE WE? MR. YEP. THE ONE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW. SO THAT JUST SO THAT WE HAVE THAT, WHAT'S THE. DAVID. I CAN'T MAKE THAT LARGER OR. THERE YOU GO. WHAT'S THE NUMBER? IT IS RIGHT HERE. I THINK THE BOUNDARY SURVEY WOULD BE IDENTIFIED AS USUALLY IT'S SK1 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 20 WHAT'S THE FILE NUMBER I DON'T HAVE THERE. IT DOESN'T HAVE A SHEET NAME. THIS IS JUST A STANDALONE SHEET. IT'S IT'S A ONE PAGE DOCUMENT. YEAH. THE ONE THAT IT DOES SAY A, A M 15 MANAGEMENT. YEP. AND IT'S THE ONE IN THE TITLE SCREEN RIGHT NOW. AND IT'S REFERENCED IN THE RESOLUTION. IT IS. MR. FURTHER DOWN. ARKANSAS. SO. WELL, I CAN TESTIFY THAT THE DATE IN THE RESOLUTION IS THE SAME AS THE DATE OF THE SURVEY. IT'S THE DATE THAT'S IN THE SEAL. THIS ONE IS. WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND. THIS IS THIS ISN'T FILED. IT'S NOT THE SUN. IT'S NOT THE SUN BIZ INFORMATION. THIS IS THE SURVEY PREPARED BY COASTAL REFERENCED IN THE RESOLUTION. FOR PURPOSES OF DEMISING, THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD, AND IT'S DATED NOVEMBER 12TH, 2024. AND THE SIGNATURE BLOCK OF MR. EWING IS NOVEMBER 12TH, 2024. IS THAT ONE THE ONE YOU HAVE WITH THE NUMBER ON IT? WELL, THERE'S AN IDENTIFICATION NUMBER. FOR CERTIFICATE NUMBER 52. IT'S AT THE VERY BOTTOM RIGHT HAND SIDE NUMBER 24.176. CAN YOU? THAT ONE WOULD BE THE REFERENCE NUMBER TO THAT. MR. DICKMAN, THAT. WELL. 24.176 ERICA THAT'S THE SURVEY THAT YOU TOOK IN AS PART OF THE APPLICATION, CORRECT? CORRECT. AND THAT'S THE SURVEY THAT'S REFERENCED IN THE RESOLUTION.

OKAY. OKAY. WE'LL JUST MAKE THOSE CHANGES ON THERE JUST SO IT IDENTIFIES THAT PARTICULAR SURVEY. AND WE GOT IT. YEAH, IT'S ELECTRONICALLY SIGNED. AND I WILL I'LL CONFIRM THAT THE ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE IS NOVEMBER 12TH, 2024. AND AS FAR AS THE PLATTED INFORMATION VERSUS THE SURVEY. OKAY, CAN YOU GIVE ME A MORE SPECIFIC QUESTION? I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. I JUST LEGALLY DO WE NEED THE PLAT FOR THE POTENTIAL ROAD. AND IS THAT ROAD OKAY? SO YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE 12 FOOT EASEMENT. I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM YOU'RE REFERRING TO THE 12 FOOT INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT ON THE NORTH EAST SIDE. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE ALLUDING TO? I THINK IT'S 30FT WIDE. INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT IS OF RECORD AND REFLECTED ON THE PLOT. BUT BECAUSE THIS IS AN ALTA SURVEY, IT'S REQUIRED TO SHOW EASEMENTS OF RECORD. SO THE SURVEY REFERENCES THE RECORDED ACCESS EASEMENT THAT IS ALSO SHOWN ON THE PLAT. SO THE SURVEY IS A GREAT INSTRUMENT IN TERMS OF. YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS

[03:00:04]

INTERCONNECTION IS PRESERVED BUT ALSO A MATTER OF RECORD. AND THEN THESE OTHER EASEMENTS DEDICATED ON THE PLAT ARE SHOWN. YEAH. IF YOU COULD, DAVID, IF YOU COULD SCROLL UP A LITTLE BIT. YEAH, I THANK YOU, MISS PASSIDOMO. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS RIGHT UP A LITTLE BIT MORE, MORE. OKAY. MORE RIGHT THERE WHERE IT SAYS THE 12 FOOT INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT. IT RUNS. OH, NO, THAT'S I THINK I'M TALKING ABOUT THE SIDE ROAD THAT WE'RE THAT'S NOT REALLY A ROAD THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE REMAINS A ROAD. IT'S NOT A ROAD TO BE CLEAR. IT'S NOT A ROAD.

IT'S NOT IT'S A IT REMAINS PRIVATE PROPERTY. IT'S AN EASEMENT. IT'S AN INGRESS AND EGRESS EASEMENT BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES. SO IT'S NOT FOR THE CITY'S BENEFIT. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE DEDICATED TO THE CITY AS A PUBLIC ROAD. AND IT DOESN'T RUN ALL THE WAY TO GOODLETTE.

IT DOES NOT. IT RUNS. IT CONNECTS WHAT WE REFER TO AS GOODLETTE ROAD NORTH, WHICH IS HERE, WHICH IS THAT INTERNAL ROAD. IT CONNECTS THIS ROAD TO THE PROPERTY, THE PRIVATE, THROUGH THIS PETITIONER'S PRIVATE PROPERTY TO THE PRIVATE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. CORRECT.

SO IT DOES NOT PROVIDE ACCESS TO GOODLETTE FRANK OR, YOU KNOW, BEYOND THAT, IT SIMPLY PROVIDES ACCESS FROM GOODLETTE ROAD NORTH THROUGH THE PETITIONER'S PRIVATE PROPERTY TO THE PRIVATE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, RIGHT. THEY HAVE MAINTAINED THAT THEY WILL OR THEY HAVE CONFIRMED THAT THEY WILL MAINTAIN THAT EGRESS. BUT IT REQUIRES COOPERATION FROM THE NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH. AND THAT'S NOT BEFORE US. CORRECT. AND THAT IF THAT IS TO CHANGE, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF THAT NEXT PIECE OF PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED, THAT THEY'RE NOT HAVING ANY IMPLICATIONS FROM THAT DEVELOPMENT AND VICE VERSA. I'VE I'VE SUBMITTED THAT IF AND WHEN THEY REDEVELOP AND IF THEY ARE ATTEMPTING TO USE THIS ASPHALT ROAD AS A MECHANISM OF INTERCONNECTION AS IT EXISTS TODAY NORTHWARD TO THEIR BENEFIT, WE WOULD ALLOW IT TO ALSO BE SOUTHWARD TO BOTH PARCELS BENEFIT. RIGHT. SO FOR THE RECORD, SORRY, BUT WE WE GET INTO THESE MESSES 20 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD AND YOU'RE NOT HERE AND I'M NOT HERE AND ERICA'S NOT HERE AND THAT NOBODY KNOWS WHAT'S HAPPENED. SO I JUST NEED THE RECORD TO BE CLEAR. DO YOU NEED ONE SECOND? OKAY, OKAY. WHILE SHE'S DOING THAT, ERICA, IS IT POSSIBLE TO MAKE THAT PART OF THE THE CONDITIONS HERE OR RECOMMENDATIONS TO MAINTAIN THAT THAT THEY MAINTAIN IT, I THINK? WELL, YES. I MEAN, I THINK WE WE KIND OF ARE BY REFERENCE OF APPROVING ALL OF THE PLANS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED. SO THAT WOULD BE A PRETTY BIG CHANGE TO THOSE PLANS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY RESTRICTED THAT, CUT THAT ACCESS OFF AND IT WAS NO LONGER THERE, THAT THAT WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK FOR A REQUIRE REVIEW.

RIGHT. BUT IT'S NOT INDICATED IN HERE. IT'S NOT SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT THAT WAY. CORRECT. I JUST CONFIRMED WITH MY CLIENT. AND IF IT IS A WILL OF COUNCIL TO ASK FOR A COMMITMENT, THE COMMITMENT READING ALONG THE LINES OF THIS IS NOT AS ARTICULATE AS AS PERFECTION.

AND WE CAN GET THERE, BUT THE CONCEPT IS TO COOPERATE WITH THE NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH TO ALLOW SOUTHBOUND INTERCONNECTION THROUGH THE SITE, ACROSS THE RECORDED ACCESS EASEMENT, AS SHOWN ON THE SURVEY INCORPORATED INTO THE RESOLUTION. SOMEBODY GOT THAT CLEARLY. THANK YOU. AND IT AND MR. FROEHLICH HAS IT AS WELL. SO WE CAN PLAY THE TAPE AND GET THAT IN THE RESOLUTION. IF IF YOU VOTE FOR IT, OF COURSE. YEAH. OKAY. YOU GOT THAT, MADAM CLERK. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE AND INDULGENCE.

ANYTHING ELSE, MISS MARTIN, THAT NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED FOR THE RESOLUTION? NOPE. NOT ON MY END, MR. DICKMAN. NO, MA'AM. OKAY. COUNCIL. WAIT, DO I HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? YET? NONE.

NO FURTHER COMMENTS FOR STAFF. WE'LL GO TO THE PETITIONER'S CLOSING REMARKS. THANK YOU FOR THE SPIRITED DISCUSSION. I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THIS. I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THIS PROCESS. I, I, I THINK MY SUMMARY IS THIS TO ME, IS THE PROCESS WORKING AT ITS VERY BEST? WHEN WE, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED, WE LOOKED AT THE PD AND WE WERE IN DOUBT WHETHER WE EVEN NEEDED TO GO THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SITE PLAN. I SHOWED YOU THAT THAT WE PREDATE THE CITY. DOING THAT FOR PD. WE DECIDED TRANSPARENCY IS BETTER THAN NOT. THEN WHEN WE WENT

[03:05:05]

THROUGH DESIGN REVIEW BOARD, WE HEARD THE NEIGHBORS. WE SAID, OKAY, WE. AND FORTUNATELY, WE HAD NEIGHBORS WHO WE WANTED TO WORK TOGETHER WITH IN THE SENSE THAT THEY TOLD US EXACTLY WHERE THEIR OBJECTIONS WERE SO WE COULD MEET THEM THERE. AND WE HAD A GREAT DESIGN TEAM THAT ULTIMATELY PRESENTED TO YOU WHAT WE THINK IS A GREAT OUTCOME. SO THERE WAS A LOT OF THIS HAS BEEN ALMOST A TWO YEAR PROCESS. THESE THINGS, AS YOU ALL KNOW AT THIS POINT, TAKE AN INCREDIBLE AMOUNT OF EFFORT AND MONEY. AND AT THIS END OF AT THIS TAIL END OF THE PROCESS, THESE ARE GOOD QUESTIONS. AND I HOPE WE WERE PREPARED IN RESPONDING TO THEM, BECAUSE WE ARE ALL VERY INVESTED IN THIS PROJECT. WITH THAT, I REALLY DO. THANK YOU. AND WE CLOSE WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL. THE DETAILS THAT MATTER COUNCIL. ANY DISCUSSION I ONE YEAH, I HAVE ONE QUESTION, MISS MARTIN, IS THE WAS THIS NOTICED JUST FOR DRB WAS THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING NOTICED SO THE NOTICE IT WAS NOTICED. THE PLAN, THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD HEARINGS WERE NOTICED AND THE NOTICE WAS SENT PRIOR TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD NOTICING THE DATE OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND THE PRACTICES WE NOTICED FOR THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD. AND THEN AT THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD, WE ANNOUNCE THE THE DATE OF THE COUNCIL HEARING. OKAY. THANK YOU. BARTON, A COUPLE OF QUICK COMMENTS. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO APPLAUD THE PETITIONER FOR THE TRANSPARENCY AND THE EFFORT TO ENGAGE WITH THE COMMUNITY. IT REALLY TURNED INTO A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT. I PERSONALLY WAS A LITTLE BUMMED ABOUT NOT HAVING THE RESTAURANT IN THE BAR ON THE ROOFTOP, BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT, BUT I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE NOT DOING THEM. MAYBE I'M A LITTLE MORE SOCIAL CREATURE THAN THE NEXT GUY, BUT AGAIN, I'M. I APPLAUD YOU GUYS FOR LISTENING TO THE NEIGHBORS THERE TO THE WEST AND, AND MAKING SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE PLAN DUE TO THAT ENGAGEMENT. I ALSO APPLAUD YOU FROM THE STANDPOINT OF RESILIENCY IS OBVIOUSLY A HUGE ISSUE THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE. AND, AND IN OUR COUNCIL TENDS TO, TO VIEW EVERYTHING THAT WE DO THROUGH A LENS THAT THAT INVOLVES OUR STORMWATER AND OUR RESILIENCY. SO AGAIN, I APPLAUD THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERMEABLE PERMEABLE PAVERS. THE FACT THAT THE, THE STORMWATER EXCEEDS THE REQUIREMENTS. SO AGAIN, THESE ARE THESE ARE EFFORTS ON YOUR BEHALF THAT THAT HONESTLY, YOU DIDN'T HAVE TO MAKE IT MADE. IT MAY HAVE MADE THIS A MEETING A LITTLE MORE DIFFICULT, BUT NONETHELESS, YOU CHOSE TO DO IT ON YOUR OWN. AND I THINK THAT'S WORTH NOTING.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, THE, THE, THE LINEAR PARK YOU'RE PUTTING IN WITH THE ROBUST LANDSCAPING THAT AGAIN, IS, IS IN EXCESS TO WHAT WAS REQUIRED. AND I WILL JUST MENTION THAT A WHILE THEY MIGHT BE A, A HOTELIER THAT'S OUT OF, I THINK MR. CLAUSSEN MIGHT HAVE SAID CHICAGO. BUT BOSTON. THANK YOU, I WILL. I WILL EMPHASIZE THAT MR. CLAUSSEN IS A LOCAL. I'VE KNOWN HIM FOR PROBABLY 25 OR 30 YEARS, AND I AGAIN APPLAUD YOU FOR FOR MAKING WHAT WHAT, IN MY OPINION, IS A REALLY GOOD LOOKING PROJECT OVER HERE. AND IT COULD HAVE BEEN SOMETHING ELSE IF WE HAD A DIFFERENT PETITIONER IN THERE BUILDING SOMETHING NOW. AND I WILL ALSO NOTE THAT THAT'S SELF-SERVING ON HIS PART BECAUSE HE IS A LOCAL AND HE HAS TO DEAL WITH LOCALS AND ANYBODY DRIVING DOWN GOODLETTE, IF THEY ALL OF A SUDDEN HAD AN UGLY PROJECT THERE, THEY'RE GOING TO TURN AROUND AND BLAME HIM. SO THAT WAS A SELF-SERVING ON HIS PART, BUT NONETHELESS, IT BENEFITS ALL OF US. SO AGAIN, I THINK THIS IS THIS IS A PRETTY GOOD LOOKING PROJECT, AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORT THAT THE PETITIONER PUT INTO MAKING IT SOMETHING THAT THAT I THINK THAT THE COMMUNITY CAN BE PROUD OF. WELL STATED. THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSIONS? OKAY. DO I HAVE A MOTION? I SUPPOSE I COULD TRY TO TACKLE THAT.

OKAY. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE SITE PLAN PETITION FOR 20 5-SP1 WITH THE FOUR CONDITIONS THAT WERE DISCUSSED EARLIER BY OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT, AND ADD IN THE. THE, THE, THE, THE MAINTAINING OF THE ACCESS SOUTH ACCESS ROAD FROM THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH IS THAT MR. DICKMAN WILL SUFFICE. SOUNDS GOOD TO ME.

SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKNER AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER KRAMER.

[03:10:02]

MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCILMEMBER KRUL. YES. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ YES.

VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP NO. COUNCILMEMBER BARTON. YES. COUNCILMEMBER KRAMER. YES.

COUNCILMEMBER PENMAN. YES. MAYOR HEITMANN NO. IT PASSES 5 TO 2. BUT, MR. CLAUSSEN, GOOD LUCK IS YOU REALLY DID A GREAT PROJECT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO ITEM 14 G. MADAM MAYOR, WE GO TO WE'RE GOING TO ITEM 12 B FIRST B THAT WAS ONLY 12 A MA'AM. 12 B IT'S AFTER 14 A THANK YOU SIR. I THOUGHT WE WERE WAY AHEAD OF

[12.B) An Amendment to Resolution 2025-15737 which Amended Resolution 2024-15421 Granting Approval of Conditional Use Petition 24-CU5, Pursuant to Section 46-34 and Section 58-833 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples Allowing a Private Beach Club in the PS, Public Service District for the Port Royal Club Located at 2900 and 2755 Gordon Drive; More Fully Described Herein; and Providing an Effective Date.]

SCHEDULE. THANK YOU. SO GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. MCCONNELL. WE HAVE RESOLUTION YES 12 B THANK YOU MAYOR. AN AMENDMENT TO RESOLUTION 2025 15737 WHICH AMENDED RESOLUTION 2024 15421 GRANTING APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PETITION 20 5-Q5 PURSUANT TO SECTION 4634 AND SECTION 50 8-8 33 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. CITY OF NAPLES ALLOWING A PRIVATE BEACH CLUB IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE DISTRICT FOR THE PORT ROYAL CLUB, LOCATED AT 2927 55 GORDON DRIVE, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. SWEARINGEN.

THAT IS INTENDING TO OFFER TESTIMONY. PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND FOR NOT PREVIOUSLY SUPPORTED. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU. OKAY. DISCLOSURES. COUNCIL.

COUNCIL MEMBER. CARL. TOWARD THE PROJECT MET WITH MANAGEMENT. FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLARITY ON WHAT WAS TO BE DISCUSSED. KRAMER FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE AND COMING BACK TO US. WE'VE ALL DEALT WITH IT ALREADY, AND I SPOKE WITH STAFF TO PREPARE AND ALSO SPOKEN TO THE PETITIONER ABOUT THIS, SCHULTZ, FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE DID VISIT THERE. THANK YOU. GENTLEMEN. FAMILIAR WITH THAT SITE? NO CONTACT.

BLANKENSHIP FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE AND A QUICK CONVERSATION WITH THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND NO OTHER CONTACT. THANK YOU. I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE. NO CONTACT WITH THAT. GOOD MORNING, MR. BERGER. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. BY 19 SECONDS, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL AND HAPPY TAX DAY. THAT'S A GREAT WAY TO START OFF THE PRESENTATION, ISN'T IT? YEAH.

PUT EVERYONE IN GOOD MOOD. OKAY. MY NAME IS CLAY BROOKER WITH THE LAW FIRM OF CHEFFY PASSIDOMO 820 ONE FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH. OUR FIRM REPRESENTS THE PORT ROYAL CLUB, WHICH A YEAR AND A HALF AGO RECEIVED CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR THE REBUILD OF ITS CLUBHOUSE AFTER ITS DESTRUCTION ON SEPTEMBER 28TH, 2022 BY HURRICANE IAN. AS EACH OF YOU ARE PROBABLY AWARE, THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE CLUBHOUSE IS WELL UNDERWAY. WE ARE HERE TODAY REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A MINOR CHANGE IN THE SEAWALL DESIGN, THE DETAILS OF WHICH I'LL EXPLAIN IN A MOMENT. NO OTHER CHANGES TO THE PROJECT ARE PROPOSED. THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL OCCURRED IN AUGUST OF 2024. THEN, LAST OCTOBER 2025, THE CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL RESOLUTION WAS REVISED WITH CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL TO REFERENCE AN UPDATED SITE PLAN, WHICH INVOLVED MINOR TWEAKS TO VARIOUS COMPONENTS OF THE REBUILD PROJECT. NOTHING TO THE CLUBHOUSE ITSELF, BUT RATHER TWEAKS TO THE ENTRANCE GATE, ENHANCEMENTS TO THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, RELOCATION OF THE HANDICAPPED ACCESS CHAIR FOR THE SWIMMING POOL, AND AN INCREASE IN THE SEAWALL HEIGHT TO EIGHT FEET TO MATCH THAT OF THE NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE CLUB'S PROPERTY. HERE'S THE REVISED CONDITIONAL USE RESOLUTION APPROVED LAST OCTOBER OCTOBER 2025. NOTE THAT THE RESOLUTION EXPRESSLY REFERENCES THE SITE PLAN FROM DAVIDSON ENGINEERING DATED JULY 3RD, 2025. AND HERE'S A ZOOMED IN PORTION OF THOSE PLANS TO ORIENT YOU. NORTH IS UP. HERE'S THE BEACH TOWARDS THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THE SCREEN. GORDON DRIVE IS OFF THE SCREEN TO THE RIGHT, AND THIS IS THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE CLUB'S PROPERTY. HERE'S THE PROPERTY LINE. THE DASHED LINE REPRESENTS THE PROPERTY LINE. AND TO THE SOUTH IS THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY

[03:15:04]

IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THE CLUB'S PROPERTY. THESE PLANS SHOWED A NEW PROPOSED SEAWALL, SHOWN HERE IN RED, THAT RETURNED OR TIED INTO THE PRIVACY WALL THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL BACK IN AUGUST OF 2024. AND HERE IS THE NEIGHBOR'S SEAWALL, AS PROPOSED OR PERMITTED BY THE D, E, P, AND NOTE THE GAP BETWEEN THE TWO RESPECTIVE SEAWALLS.

SEVERAL MONTHS AFTER THE CITY GRANTED THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR THE CLUBHOUSE IN AUGUST 2024, THE CLUB THEN BEGAN PURSUING THE REQUIRED COASTAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FOR, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THE SEAWALL DESIGN. THAT APPLICATION PROCESS RESULTED IN A FOCUS ON THE GAP BETWEEN THE SEAWALLS. HERE AGAIN, AS WE JUST SAW IN THE PREVIOUS PAGE, IS THE ORIGINAL PROPOSED DESIGN OF THE SEAWALL. THIS IS THE HANDIWORK OF TIM MCCARTHY. THAT'S HIS HAND DRAWING, WHICH I THOUGHT WAS VERY IMPRESSIVE. BUT YOU'LL SEE HERE IN RED IS THE NEW SEAWALL, AND IT TIES INTO THE PRIVACY WALL HERE. AND AGAIN, HERE IS THE NEIGHBOR'S SEAWALL WITH THE GAP BETWEEN THE TWO. THE CONCERN WAS WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IN AN EPISODE OF SIGNIFICANT WAVE ACTION. WOULD THE GAP ALLOW OR EVEN FACILITATE A FUNNELING OF WATER THROUGH THE GAP AND DOWN THE SHARED PROPERTY LINE, CAUSING UNKNOWN DAMAGE TO BOTH PROPERTIES? THE OBVIOUS SOLUTION TO THIS CONCERN WAS TO CLOSE THE GAP, AND THAT'S WHAT WAS ULTIMATELY DONE WITH THE DPP'S APPROVAL. SO RECALL THAT THE CITY'S CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL RESOLUTION WAS REVISED WITH MINOR TWEAKS APPROXIMATELY SIX MONTHS AGO, IN OCTOBER OF 2025.

AT THAT TIME, WE SHOWED THE GRAPHIC ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE OF THE SCREEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND EXPLAINED THAT THERE WOULD BE A CONTINUOUS EIGHT FOOT SEAWALL STRETCHING ALONG THESE PROPERTIES WITH NO GAPS. THAT WAS THE REVISED DESIGN IN THE HANDS OF THE D, E, P AT THE TIME, BUT THE DEP HAD NOT YET ISSUED ITS PERMIT. SO JUST TO TO FOCUS IN ON HERE, HERE IS THE AREA IN QUESTION BETWEEN THE CLUB'S PROPERTY, THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THE NORTH, TO THE SOUTH. AND IT SHOWS HERE GRAPHICALLY WITHOUT A WHOLE LOT OF DETAIL, A CONTINUOUS WALL WITH NO GAPS. THAT'S WHAT WAS SHOWN TO THE CITY COUNCIL LAST OCTOBER. LO AND BEHOLD, TWO WEEKS AFTER WE APPEARED BEFORE CITY COUNCIL, THE DEP ISSUED ITS PERMIT AND THAT IS SHOWN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCREEN HERE, WITH THE GAP ELIMINATED AND THE SEAWALL TIED INTO THE NEIGHBOR'S SEAWALL BASED ON THE DEPS PERMIT, THE CITY THEN ISSUED ITS OWN COASTAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT A FEW MONTHS LATER, SHOWN HERE ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SCREEN, ESSENTIALLY MIRRORING THE DEP'S APPROVAL. THE ISSUANCE OF THESE PERMITS SHOWN HERE OCCURRED TOWARD THE END OF LAST YEAR, AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS YEAR. FAST FORWARD A COUPLE OF MONTHS, JUST TO JUST A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. THE CLUB THEN APPLIED FOR ITS ACTUAL BUILDING PERMIT TO THE CITY TO ACTUALLY BUILD THE SEAWALL. PART OF THAT BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION PROCESS REQUIRES STAFF TO REVIEW THE BUILDING PERMIT PLANS TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY WITH THE SITE PLAN OR WHATEVER OTHER PLANS THE COUNCIL HAS APPROVED. THAT'S WHEN THE STAFF NOTICED THAT THE CONDITIONAL USE RESOLUTION, AS WE STAND HERE TODAY, STILL REFERENCES THE OLD PLANS DATED JULY 3RD, 2025, WITH THE GAP IN THE SEAWALL, STAFF BROUGHT THIS TO OUR ATTENTION AND WE SAID, YES, YOU'RE RIGHT. ABSOLUTELY. WE NEED TO UPDATE THE CONDITIONAL USE RESOLUTION TO REFLECT THE UPDATED PLANS AND THE REVISED SEAWALL DESIGN WITH NO GAP. SO THAT'S IT. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. THE PLAN SHOWN HERE. ILLUSTRATE THE REVISED SEAWALL DESIGN. AGAIN, THE PROPOSED SEAWALL. INSTEAD OF TYING INTO THE PRIVACY WALL HERE, WILL EXTEND TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND JOIN UP WITH THE NEIGHBOR'S SEAWALL TO THE SOUTH, THEREBY ELIMINATING THE GAP. WE HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE NEIGHBOR TO OUR SOUTH, THE OWNER OF THE SEAWALL TO WHICH OUR SEAWALL WILL CONNECT, AND HE EXPRESSED NO OBJECTION. FRANKLY, HE THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA. SO WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE RESOLUTION IN THE AGENDA MATERIALS, WHICH HAS BEEN REVISED ONLY TO REFERENCE THE UPDATED SITE PLAN. NO OTHER CHANGES ARE PROPOSED. THANK YOU, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. AND JUST TO CONFIRM, BOTH SEAWALLS WILL STILL BE THE SAME HEIGHT, EIGHT FEET, CORRECT? YES, SIR. THANKS. ALL RIGHT. ERIC MARTIN, PLANNING DIRECTOR

[03:20:12]

WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO A RESOLUTION. THIS IS AMENDING RESOLUTION 20 DASH 20 OR 2020 5-15737, WHICH AMENDED RESOLUTION 24 2020 4-15421.

THIS WAS GRANTING APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE PORT ROYAL CLUB, SLIGHTEST OF CORRECTIONS HERE IS IS JUST TO CHANGE THE SET OF PLANS THAT WILL BE REFERENCED IN THE RESOLUTION TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING'S CONSISTENT ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE BOARD. WE DID NOTICE THIS TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1000FT. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE RELATED TO THAT. NOTICING STAFF DOESN'T THERE'S NOT AN ISSUE. THIS DOESN'T CHANGE THE THE CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL FOR THE BUILDING. IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FUNCTION OF THE CLUB. IF ANYTHING, IT PROBABLY MAKES IT BETTER. WELL, I'M SURE IT MAKES IT BETTER. SO THAT'S JUST A REAL QUICK CORRECTION TO THE RESOLUTION. NO CONCERNS FROM ANY OF YOUR CITY STAFF. THANKS.

I JUST I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS RESOLUTION. SO IT'S AMENDING 251573. DO THE DETAILS.

WHEREASES IN THE SECTIONS NEED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT. JUST ADDING THE REASON FOR THIS CHANGE. WE CAN ADD A RECITAL. I'M JUST ASKING IF IT'S NOT NECESSARY. I'M. WELL, I THINK THE FACT THAT IT REFERENCES AN UPDATED PLAN IS IN FACT THE AMENDMENT. BUT YEAH, I HAVE NO.

IT DOESN'T HURT TO ADD A RECITAL JUST SO WE. IN SECTION THREE, WE DID SECTION THREE OF THE RESOLUTION. THAT'S BEFORE YOU. IT DOES SAY ALL OTHER CONDITIONS OF RESOLUTIONS 20 OR 2020 4-15421 AND 2020 5-15737 REMAIN IN FULL FORCE IN EFFECT CORRECT. I THINK THE MAYOR'S QUESTION WAS SHOULD WE ADD THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT, WHICH IS SIMPLY TO JUST REPLACE THE PLAN AND RECITAL? IF I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY, WHICH I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH. AGAIN, RECITALS TELL A STORY. YEAH. SO 20 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT SOMEONE CAN READ IT AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS WAS FOR. AND I DON'T THINK IT'S A BAD IDEA TO MAKE IT SPECIFIC TO. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? OKAY. DO I HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? OKAY. PETITIONER CLOSING REMARKS RESPECTFULLY REQUEST APPROVAL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. COUNCIL DISCUSSION OR MOTION. I MOVE APPROVAL OF THIS RESOLUTION. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BLANKENSHIP FOR APPROVAL AND A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. IS THAT SUBJECT TO ADDING THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. THANK YOU, MADAM CLERK. THANK YOU. I WAS JUST YEAH. OKAY.

SORRY. WE'LL JUST ADD IT TO THE SECOND TO LAST RECITAL. WE'LL REFERENCE THE PLAN, CHANGE THE SECONDER. ACCEPT THAT CHANGE. MR. SCHULTZ. VICE MAYOR. YOU BET. OKAY. MADE THEM CHANGE.

SCHULTZ AGREES. PERFECT. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES.

VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRULL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES.

COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ. YES. MAYOR HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT CONCLUDES ITEM 12 B 14 A YES, THANK YOU. MAYOR. A RESOLUTION APPROVING A RIGHT

[14.A) A Resolution Approving a Right-of-Way Conversion to Parking Application with Special Conditions for Paver Parking within the Public Right-of-Way Fronting the North Bay Side Property of 1350 Jewel Box Avenue ; and Providing an Effective Date.]

OF WAY CONVERSION TO PARKING APPLICATION WITH SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR PAVER PARKING WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY FRONTING THE NORTH BAY SIDE PROPERTY OF 1350 JEWEL BOX AVENUE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. HOLD ON A SECOND. WE HAVE CHANGING SWEARING IN, MADAM CLERK. FOR THOSE INTENDING TO OFFER TESTIMONY, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY ABOUT TO GIVE BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO. THANK YOU. COUNCIL DISCLOSURES. COUNCIL MEMBER CROW, I'M FAMILIAR WITH LOCATION. NO DISCLOSURES. KRAMER STAFF ABOUT THIS AS WELL.

JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, SCHULTZ. I'M FAMILIAR WITH PROPERTY DISCLOSURES. DISCLOSURES. THANK DISCUSSION WITH THE PLANNING DIRECTOR. NOTHING ELSE. OKAY. AND I HAVE NO CORRESPONDENCE AND NO COMMUNICATIONS, BUT DROVE BY THE SITE WITH THAT. DO WE HAVE PETITIONER'S PETITIONER?

[03:25:12]

ALLISON BECKETT, CITY ENGINEER FOR THE RECORD, I AM GOING TO ASSIST AS THE PETITIONER DOES NOT HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE TODAY, SO I'M GOING TO GO OVER THE INFORMATION ON HER BEHALF AND THEN TURN IT OVER FOR HER TO PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS THAT SHE MAY HAVE. WITH THAT. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A REQUEST FOR HARDSCAPE PARKING WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY UNDER UNDER CITY RESOLUTIONS 99 DASH 8455 AND OH ONE 9256. CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR HARDSCAPE, PARKING AND THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. JEWEL BOX AVENUE IS A UNIQUE STREET WITHIN THE CITY OF NAPLES, WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL HOMES ARE ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE ROADWAY. THE NORTH SIDE CONSISTS OF SKINNY LOTS ALONG THE BAY. MOST OF THE PROPERTIES ALONG THIS CORRIDOR HAVE DOCKS AND THAT'S THE INTENTION FOR THESE. THE PARKING. THROUGH RESEARCHING AERIAL IMAGES, IT APPEARS THE PROPERTY AT 1350 JEWEL BOX AVENUE PLACED GRAVEL WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ALONG THE CANAL FRONTAGE OF JEWEL BOX AVENUE TO ESTABLISH PARKING SPACES. THERE WAS NO PERMIT ON FILE FOR THE GRAVEL PARKING. REVIEWING THESE AERIALS, THE GRAVEL PARKING APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN PLACED BETWEEN 2021 AND 2022. ON NOVEMBER 20TH OF 2024, A COMPLAINT WAS MADE REGARDING AN UNPERMITTED PAVER INSTALLATION WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, WITH NO ACTIVE ISSUED PERMITS. COLLIER COUNTY CONTRACTOR LICENSING WAS INVOLVED IN THE INVESTIGATION AS THE CONTRACTOR WAS IN VIOLATION. THE CONTRACTOR SUBMITTED A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT APPLICATION SHORTLY AFTER TO BEGIN THE COMPLIANCE PROCESS. REVISIONS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WERE REQUIRED THROUGH THE REVIEW PROCESS AND DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS, THE FLORIDA STATUTES WERE AMENDED IN THE CONTRACTOR'S REQUIREMENTS CHANGED TO PROHIBIT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM REQUIRING OR ENFORCING LOCAL LICENSING FOR PAVING CONTRACTORS. THIS, HOWEVER, DID NOT RELEASE THE REQUIREMENT FOR COMPLIANCE ON THE PERMIT OF THE FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER, SO THE APPLICANT SEEKS AN AFTER THE FACT APPROVAL FOR THE PAVER INSTALLATION WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THIS WOULD REPLACE THE EXISTING UNPERMITTED GRAVEL, WHICH ALSO IS IN VIOLATION WITH A FORMAL PARKING PAVER PARKING AREA. TYPICALLY, THE ADDITION OF HARDSCAPE PARKING PROVIDES A COMMUNITY BENEFIT BY PROVIDING ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACES FOR THE PUBLIC, THEREBY ALLEVIATING PARKING LIMITATIONS AND AREAS WHERE WE HAVE HIGH DEMAND. THIS IS WHERE WE TYPICALLY SEE THESE REQUESTS. HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE, THE BENEFIT OF PARKING ALONG THIS CORRIDOR CORRIDOR DOES NOT PROVIDE THIS BENEFIT AS IT REALLY ONLY BENEFITS THE PROPERTY OWNERS. ALONG ALONG THIS STRETCH, I WOULD LIKE TO GO TO A THE PLANS AND I'M SORRY IF I. IT'S RIGHT HERE. SO RIGHT HERE. IN GIVING YOU THIS DESCRIPTION, I THINK THE VISUALS ARE VERY HELPFUL AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF THIS. SO YOU CAN SEE ON THIS PLAN RIGHT HERE, THE PROPERTY, THE PROPERTY, THE OWNERSHIP IS THE THE HOME IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND THE, THE PARKING THAT IS MARKED OUT HERE IS, IS HASHED OUT IN RED. THE THEY DO OWN THE PROPERTY JUST TO THE NORTH OF THIS. WITH THIS BEING FLIPPED AROUND, IT'S THROWING ME OFF A LITTLE BIT. SO WE HAVE SOME PHOTOS. HERE'S A PHOTO OF THE CONDITIONS OF WHAT IS HERE TODAY AND I TRIED TO GO THROUGH. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF VISUALS OR SOME CURRENT PHOTOGRAPHS. THE PART OF WHAT I WANTED TO NOTE IN THESE DETAILS IS THERE HAS BEEN LANDSCAPE PLANNING IN THIS AREA WITHOUT A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT AS WELL. COMPLIANCE WILL REQUIRE THE REMOVAL OF ANY UNPERMITTED PLANTINGS WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY. NOTING. AS PART OF THIS, I DID WANT TO NOTE THAT THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE STREET ALREADY DOES HAVE A FUNCTIONAL DRIVEWAY. THIS REQUEST IS INTENDED REALLY FOR GUEST PARKING. WHILE THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S CHARACTER, THE TYPICAL COMMUNITY BENEFIT OF LEAVING THE PARKING DEMAND IS LESS APPLICABLE ON THIS SPECIFIC CORRIDOR, AND PRIOR TO THE PAVERS, THE SITE, AS I HAD MENTIONED, CONSISTED OF UNPERMITTED ROCK. WHILE THE PROPOSED PAVERS MATCHED THE ESTHETIC OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, MANY OF THESE NEW NEARBY INSTALLATIONS ARE ALSO OUT OF COMPLIANCE. THAT IS A BIG PART OF THIS DISCUSSION THAT I WANTED TO INCLUDE IN HERE, BECAUSE AS THIS PROPERTY OWNER WAS TAGGED, BECAUSE OF

[03:30:03]

THE NONCOMPLIANCE, LOOKING AT AND LOOKING IN, EVALUATING THE CHARACTERISTIC OF THIS ENTIRE SECTION OF ROAD, THERE'S SEVERAL PROPERTIES THAT ARE OUT OF COMPLIANCE. SO TO FAIRLY EVALUATE THIS, THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I WANTED TO PRESENT THAT TO YOU AS WELL. SO YOU ARE AWARE OF AND I HAVE THAT I HAVE ADDITIONAL PHOTOS TO INCORPORATE IN TO PROVIDE TO YOU AS WELL. SO AS PART OF THIS, THEY DID PROVIDE JUST A TYPICAL PAVER INSTALLATION IN THE IN THE PAST, YOU MAY RECALL THAT WHEN WE'VE HAD THESE APPLICATIONS COME BEFORE YOU, IF ANYONE FOR ANYONE THAT'S BEEN ON COUNCIL PREVIOUSLY, IT'S BEEN MANY YEARS ACTUALLY, SINCE WE'VE HAD A REQUEST FOR INSTALLATION OF PARKING WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. BUT THEY TYPICALLY HAVE BEEN WE'VE LOOKED AT A MORE GREEN APPLICATION OR A TURF BLOCK SYSTEM TO MAINTAIN A GREENER, MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY APPEARANCE AND ALSO FOR WATER QUALITY CONCERNS AS WELL. SO THAT WAS SOMETHING IF WE DO LOOK AT THESE AND I WANT TO PROVIDE AS PART OF MY RECOMMENDATION, IS THAT IF WE DO WANT TO ACCEPT THIS, PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO LOOK AT THE APPLICATION OF A PERMEABLE APPLICATION, PERMEABLE TURF APPLICATION, TURF PAVERS OR PERMEABLE PAVER SYSTEM. AND TYPICALLY WE ALSO LOOK AT A PARALLEL PARKING TYPE OF SYSTEM TO BETTER ALIGN WITH THE CITY'S PREFERENCES AND OUR RIGHT OF WAYS. SO AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THESE PHOTOS AND SHOW YOU THIS IS THE EXISTING CONDITIONS RIGHT HERE. THIS IS THE 1350 PROPERTY. THIS IS THE PRE THIS IS THE 2020. THIS DATES BACK TO I BELIEVE 2024. THIS IS BEFORE THE THE INSTALLATION OF THE PAVERS. SO YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE WAS GRAVEL HERE AT THAT TIME. AND PREDATING THAT IN 2019 IT WAS GRASS. AND THIS WAS THE CONDITION BEFORE, WHICH IS CONSISTENT AS GOING THROUGH OTHER PROPERTIES, WHICH I HAVE ANOTHER SLIDE OR ANOTHER. SO THIS RIGHT HERE IS WHAT I ALSO WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU IN CONSIDERATION FOR THIS APPLICATION. THIS IS THESE ARE MORE RECENT PHOTOS THAT WE'VE TAKEN. I HAVE A MIXTURE OF, OF THROUGH THE YEARS AS WELL ALONG THIS CORRIDOR. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S BEEN IMPROVEMENTS ALONG THIS CORRIDOR. I WANTED TO REQUEST AND AS THIS BEING A VERY UNIQUE STREET, I REALLY WANT TO LOOK FOR DIRECTION GO THROUGH. I WANTED TO SHOW YOU WHAT WE HAVE HERE. UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S THINGS THAT RIGHT HERE IN THIS PHOTO THAT ARE REALLY ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND AND OUT OF COMPLIANCE.

SO I'M BRINGING THAT. IF YOU DID MAKE A VISIT, A SITE VISIT, YOU MAY HAVE NOTICED I WAS KIND OF IN SHOCK TO SEE BASKETBALL COURT SET UP. SO THIS IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING THAT I THINK WE WILL HAVE TO BRING INTO COMPLIANCE AND THAT WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED. BUT AS WE GO FORWARD, AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE IF WE'RE REACHING OUT TO THE THE RESIDENTS AND BRINGING THIS INTO COMPLIANCE THAT WE HAVE FULL DIRECTION AS FAR AS ARE WE GOING TO ALLOW THE BRICK PAVERS IN THIS THIS AREA? WHAT WOULD WE ALLOW? DO WE WANT TO HAVE A MORE UNIFORM LOOK ALONG THIS CORRIDOR AND PRESENTING TO YOU WHAT IS ACTUALLY OUT THERE TODAY FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION? CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE WE CERTAINLY HAVE A MIXED MATCH OF CONDITIONS CURRENTLY IN THIS AT THIS TIME. AND NONE OF THESE LOOKING THROUGH OUR AND DIGGING INTO OUR RECORDS HAVE A PERMIT ON FILE FOR FOR PARKING IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR CONVERTING THESE TO PARKING SPACES. AND CLEARLY NOT FOR A BASKETBALL COURT. SO THAT IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS, AS I BELIEVE IS FAIRLY RECENT. TYPICALLY OUR COMPLIANCE, WE WILL REACH OUT AND MAKE SURE THAT THOSE THINGS ARE EVALUATED. BUT AGAIN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE AS WE REACH OUT TO THESE RESIDENTS, I'D LIKE TO MAKE SURE WE ARE WE HAVE THE APPLICANT BEFORE YOU TODAY THAT WE HAVE DIRECTION AND APPROVAL OR WHICH DIRECTION WE WE SHOULD GO ON CONSIDERATION OF THIS VERY UNIQUE STREET WITHIN THE CITY. WITH THAT, I WILL TURN IT OVER FOR ANY QUESTIONS. SO, MAYOR, BEFORE WE MAY I FOR A MINUTE BEFORE WE GET TO QUESTIONS? YES, BECAUSE I THINK

[03:35:01]

THIS DISCUSSION IS TWOFOLD. SO FOR THE RECORD, WE DID SWEAR IN FOR THE THE SITE SPECIFIC APPLICATION BEFORE YOU. SO I THINK FOR RECORD PURPOSES, WE SHOULD FOCUS OUR QUESTIONS ON THE SITE SPECIFIC ONE. AND THEN ONCE THAT RECORD IS CLOSED AND THE VOTE OCCURS, THEN WE CAN HAVE THE MORE GENERAL POLICY DISCUSSION. OKAY. JUST BECAUSE THIS IS QUASI JUDICIAL IN NATURE AND NONE OF THOSE OTHER PROPERTIES HAVE FILED APPLICATIONS, THAT'S MORE OF A LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION OF COUNCIL. SO MY SUGGESTION IS TO KEEP THE QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO THIS APPLICATION, AND THEN WE CAN ADDRESS THE REMAINING PORTION OF THIS AVENUE. THANK YOU.

THAT'S CLAIRE, COUNCILMAN BARTON. YES, I'LL. ASK THE QUESTION SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THIS PROPERTY IN QUESTION HERE. HOWEVER, THE ANSWER IS GOING TO APPLY TO ALL OF THEM. WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS? WELL, SINCE THERE'S NO IT SHOULD BE THE PROPERTY OWNER. THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR FRONTING THEIR PROPERTIES. AND SINCE THEY OWN THE PROPERTY ALONG THE STRETCH, AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN THE THE BOTTOM PORTION OF THE, THE PHOTO HERE, THEY OWN THAT SKINNY PORTION THERE, THE RESIDENT OR THE PROPERTY ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY. HOWEVER, ANY IMPROVEMENTS THEY SHOULD HAVE A PROPER RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT FOR THOSE AND APPROVALS AND THOSE HAVE REQUIREMENTS CONNECTED WITH THOSE SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT ARE IN REFERENCE TO UPKEEP OR MAINTENANCE. YES. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. I HAVE KRAMER, THAT WAS IT. HE JUST STOLE MY THUNDER. SURE. JUST A COMMENT. WHOEVER SPENT THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY ON THAT BASKETBALL, THAT'S A THAT'S A SERIOUS HOOP. THAT WOULD BE IT.

ANY GYMNASIUM. THEY'RE GOING TO BE TICKED. SO SOMEBODY SPENT A LOT OF MONEY ON THAT AND GETTING THAT NICE. SO BE PREPARED FOR SOME PEOPLE BEING ANNOYED. THANK YOU. OKAY.

BLANKENSHIP. SO WHAT'S ACTUALLY THERE RIGHT NOW THERE IS A MIXTURE. SO IT THIS PROPERTY THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW, IT IS IT IS THE PAVERS. WHAT YOU HAVE, THIS IS THE CURRENT CONDITION RIGHT HERE. AND THOSE ARE NON PERMEABLE. NOT JUST YES, STANDARD PAVERS AND. OKAY. DO YOU KNOW, IS THE APPLICANT WILLING TO SWITCH TO A PERMEABLE SYSTEM? THE THE. YES.

THE WELL, I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER, BUT IN OUR DISCUSSIONS, I THINK SHE WAS WILLING TO COMPLY. I THINK SHE WAS INTERESTED IN A MORE UNIFORM LOOK ALONG THE CORRIDOR. I THINK HER MAIN CONCERN WAS JUST MAKING SURE SHE'S TREATED AS AS THE SAME AS HER NEIGHBORS. IT MAKES SENSE. AND I KNOW WE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE WHOLE STREET, BUT WHEN WE HAVE PROPERTIES LIKE THIS RIGHT BY THE WATER, I THINK PERMEABLE IS BEST, PARTICULARLY IF YOU'RE GOING TO PARK CARS THAT COULD LEAK OIL AND GAS INTO THE GROUND THAT COULD THEN BE WASHED RIGHT INTO THE WATER. I REALLY THINK WE NEED SOME SOME, SOME, SOME SORT OF PERMEABLE SYSTEM, WHETHER IT'S CROCHET OR GRAVEL OR THE, WHAT DO YOU CALL IT, THE TURF BLOCK SYSTEM. THERE'S, THERE'S DIFFERENT TYPES THAT ARE USED A LOT IN THE CITY AND THAT'S ALSO GOOD. SO I UNDERSTAND THEY WANT TO HAVE A UNIFORM LOOK, BUT TO ME SOME FORM OF PERMEABLE SYSTEM WOULD BE BEST. ASSUMING WE GO THIS DIRECTION. ALISON, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE FOR CARING FOR THAT? THEN THE PROPERTY OWNER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TYPICALLY WE WE PUT IN CONDITIONS FOR LIABILITY AND MAINTENANCE OF THOSE PAVERS. WE DO NOT AS, AS, AS WAS MENTIONED IN THE PRIOR DISCUSSIONS ON ON BRICK PAVERS WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, WE DON'T WANT TO MAINTAIN THOSE. WE WANT THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO MAINTAIN THOSE. UNLESS THE CITY IS INSTALLED IN A SPECIAL CASE. THAT'S THAT'S ON BEHALF OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. AND THE ONLY THING AGAIN, THAT IT. WHILE THE PROPERTY OWNER MAINTAINS THEM PER OUR OUR CODE, THE. THOSE PARKING SPACES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. SO ANYONE CAN PULL UP THERE AND PARK RIGHT. AGAIN, THERE'S NOT A DRAW BECAUSE OF THE LOCATION, BUT THAT ULTIMATELY IS THE THE PROPERTY OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY AND MAINTENANCE. OKAY. VERY WELL.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? I HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. I SEE NONE. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCIL. OKAY. I MEAN, PAVERS ON THE RIGHT OF WAY IS NEVER A GOOD IDEA. I

[03:40:01]

MEAN, BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH YOU SAY THE HOMEOWNER IS RESPONSIBLE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOMEONE IN THE CITY TOUCHED IT OR SOMETHING, IT CREATES A LOT OF LIABILITY ON THE CITY.

THAT'S JUST SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING HERE TOO. WELL, MATTHEW HAS AN OPINION ON THAT, BUT I DEFINITELY DO. SO I'M ASSUMING THERE WILL BE A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT IF THIS IS APPROVED. YES. THIS IS ACTUALLY SUBMITTED AS A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT. AND BUT IT COMES AS A CONVERSION OF GREEN SPACE TO HARDSCAPE PARKING IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. SO YES. SO AND IF COUNCIL DOES WANT TO APPROVE THAT, THEN A CONDITION SHOULD BE A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT ALONG WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. NOT ONLY WILL IT LIMIT LIABILITY, BUT AT ANY GIVEN TIME GIVEN 30 DAY NOTICE, THE CITY CAN RIP UP WHATEVER IT NEEDS TO TO ACCESS OUR RIGHT OF WAY. AND THIS WILL BE A COMMON THEME BASED ON OUR GENERAL DISCUSSION. BUT YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE THAT. ADDITIONALLY ADDED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED. BUT THERE IS A TEMPLATE THAT WE CREATED FOR MAILBOXES AND FOR THINGS OF THIS NATURE THAT I CAN UTILIZE. SO I WOULD MAKE THAT REQUEST AS PART OF THIS APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SO WISHES. AND IF IT IS RIPPED UP, THERE'LL BE THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PUT BACK THE PAVERS. ABSOLUTELY NOT. OKAY. JUST CHECKING. ABSOLUTELY NOT. YEAH. WHICH IS TYPICAL IN THE CONDITIONS FOR ANY OF THESE APPLICATIONS. ONLY IF WE WERE TO ACCESS IT FOR OUR CITY USE.

CORRECT. WHICH COULD BE ANYTHING AT THE END OF THE DAY IS OUR PROPERTY. OKAY.

PRESUMING WE DO THIS, WE MIGHT WANT TO FIND OUT WHO WHO DID THAT AND ASK THEM IF THEY WOULD LIKE THEIR BASKETBALL. THE WHOLE THING AND GIVE IT BACK TO THEM BECAUSE THAT'S A PRETTY EXPENSIVE PIECE AND JUST LET THEM TAKE IT. OR MAYBE THEY'LL CONCEDE TO TAKE IT OUT. YEAH, YEAH. NO. I'M SORRY. OKAY. BUT IT'S THAT ONE. YES. IT'S PART OF THAT. WE WOULD REACH OUT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE COLLECTIVE FEEDBACK ON WHAT WE WOULD ALLOW BEYOND THE THE BASKETBALL HOOP. THEY WOULD BE NOTIFIED THAT THAT'S NOT THEY DO NOT HAVE A PERMIT ON FILE. IT'S OUT OF COMPLIANCE. IT'S IN THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT OF WAY. IT'S NOT THEIR PRIVATE PROPERTY. NO ARGUMENT. IT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED. I GET IT, BUT THEY MAY WANT IT BACK. YES. AND THEY THEY WOULD HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY TOO, RIGHT? THEY WILL BE THE ONES REMOVING IT. I DON'T BELIEVE WE WILL. THE CITY WILL BE REMOVING THAT. THAT'S NOT THE TYPICAL WAY. WE. THANK YOU. YES. ANY PARTICULAR FURTHER CONVERSATION ON THIS ITEM? BLANKENSHIP? YEAH. JUST. SHOULD WE ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY'RE WILLING TO SWITCH TO A PERMEABLE SYSTEM? YES. PLEASE. YES. YEAH. I DON'T KNOW IF SHE WAS OR NOT. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. I AM. OH, I'M REBECCA MADDOX, IF YOU CAN RAISE YOUR HAND. OH, YEAH. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE YOU THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? I DO THANK YOU. I'M REBECCA. NO. NOT YET. YOU GOT IT? ALRIGHT. I'M REBECCA MADDOX, AND YES, I'M WILLING TO MAKE WHATEVER CHANGES YOU ALL WANT ME TO MAKE.

I WOULD LOVE FOR THE STREET TO HAVE A STANDARD BECAUSE WHEN I LEFT TODAY, THERE WERE PROBABLY 40 CARS PARKED. THE BASKETBALL GOAL. JET SKIS, ETC. IT'S A. I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 25 YEARS AND I DON'T THINK ANYONE'S EVER. I MEAN, PEOPLE PUT GRASS, THEY PUT UP ROCKS. THEY PUT GRASS WITH NO SPRINKLERS. SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, PART OF BEING HERE IS GREAT BECAUSE MY HOPE WOULD BE THE STANDARD WOULD CHANGE THE WHOLE STREET AND HOW IT LOOKS. SO THANK YOU. OKAY. YES.

JUST REAL QUICK QUESTION. FROM A PROCEDURAL STANDPOINT, IT'S MY INCLINATION TO APPROVE THIS, BUT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS MAKING IT SOME TYPE OF PERMEABLE PRODUCT. BUT I AGREE THAT THE WHOLE STREET SHOULD HAVE TO APPLY. WE SHOULD WE SHOULD HAVE APPLICATIONS TO THE ENTIRE STREET FOR EVERY PARKING AREA IN THERE. HOW DO WE DO THAT? DO WE NEED TO MAKE. DO WE NEED TO MAKE RULES FOR THE STREET PRIOR TO MAKING. PRIOR TO APPROVING A RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT? NO. OKAY, SO I WOULD FOCUS ON THE CONDITIONS FOR THIS PERMEABLE RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT, RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. GET THIS OUT OF THE WAY. AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A VERY QUICK GENERAL DISCUSSION ON HOW TO HANDLE THE STREET. OH, OKAY. I'VE BEEN SAYING. SO YOU EITHER YOU HAVE A CHOICE. EITHER THE PERMEABLE PAVER OR GRASS, RIGHT. THAT'LL BE LIKE THE TWO CHOICES, RIGHT? CAN WE. I'M SORRY. CAN WE GO AHEAD AND ACT ON. IN THE END, THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT STREET DEPARTMENT HAS A

[03:45:02]

RESPONSIBILITY WHEN THEY SEE RIGHT OF WAYS THAT ARE IMPROVED BEYOND THAT, WHICH IS APPROPRIATE THAT THEY HAVE TO AND NOTIFY THEM. THAT'S HOW YOU GET INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY APPLICATION PROCEDURE AND BRING THEM BEFORE YOU. SO NO MATTER IF YOU SAY ANOTHER WORD ON THE TOPIC, WE STILL HAVE TO ADDRESS THOSE PROPERTIES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED WITHIN ON THAT STREET. HOW YOU WANT THEM ADDRESSED. YOU CAN DISCUSS AFTER THIS ONE, BUT I JUST WANTED TO REST. MAKE IT KNOWN TO YOU THAT REGARDLESS, ONCE YOU IDENTIFY THEY EXIST, WE HAVE TO ADDRESS AS AS OF RIGHT OF WAY. SO I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT FROM THAT STANDPOINT.

AND I JUST CLARIFY THAT IT HAS TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER FOR A RIGHT OF WAY APPROVAL. DO I UNDERSTAND THAT? SO WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR ANY CONVERSION BECAUSE OF THE RESOLUTIONS THAT I NOTED NOTED AT THE BEGINNING, YOU THEY THESE APPLICATIONS, EVERY CONVERSION OF GREEN. IF ANYONE WANTS TO CONVERT GREEN SPACE TO HARDSCAPE PARKING. AND EVEN IF IT'S BEEN THERE HISTORICALLY, WE BRING IT BEFORE YOU. IT IS REQUIRED CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THOSE APPLICATIONS. AND THAT'S WHY I ALSO WANTED TO BRING UP THESE OTHER. THERE'S APPROXIMATELY. I THINK I COUNTED AROUND 11 OTHER PROPERTIES. I DIDN'T WANT TO. I WANTED TO TACKLE THIS. AND WE DISCUSSED THIS PREVIOUSLY. WE WANTED TO TO PRESENT THIS BEFORE YOU GET SOME FEEDBACK ON THIS, BEFORE REACHING OUT AND TRYING TO BRING THESE OTHER ONES INTO COMPLIANCE AND DETERMINING WHETHER BECAUSE THESE ARE ITEMS THAT ARE REQUIRE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL, THAT THAT'S, THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER TO, TO PRESENT TO YOU. AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND THE, THE OWNERS AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS. AND AS WE RELAY TO THESE PROPERTY OWNERS, WE UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU WHAT YOUR INTERESTS ARE IN THESE THESE APPLICATIONS, THE PERMEABLE PAVERS, PARALLEL PARKING VERSUS PERPENDICULAR PARKING. WHAT WHAT DIRECTIONS AND WHAT INTERESTS WE WANT TO HAVE IN ENSURING THAT THESE ARE COMING IN CORRECTLY. AND, AND MAYBE WE CAN STREAMLINE THEM SLIGHTLY SOMEHOW AS THEY COME IN NOT TAKING AS MUCH TIME. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING, FOR CLARIFYING FOR ME THE PROCESS. OKAY, WITH THAT, NO FURTHER DISCUSSIONS. AND DO I HAVE A MOTION? I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THIS RESOLUTION APPROVING A RIGHT OF WAY CONVERSION TO PARKING APPLICATION WITH SPECIAL CONDITIONS FOR PAVER PARKING. THERE. ON THE NORTH BAY SIDE, PROPERTY OF 1350 JEWEL BOX AVENUE. PROVIDING WE HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT AND A RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT AS APPROVED BY OUR CITY ATTORNEY. SECOND, I BELIEVE THERE WAS A SUGGESTION FOR PERMEABLE AND THAT THE. ONE OF THE CONDITIONS. AND YOU'RE ALREADY. YEAH I THINK YEAH. IS THAT A CONDITION. YEAH. OKAY. WITH WITH THE CONDITIONS AS AS STATED IN THE AGENDA ITEM, I HAVE A MOTION. NO, I'M SORRY, I DON'T KNOW IF I'M LOOKING AT THE WRONG RESOLUTION, BUT I DON'T SEE THE CONDITIONS. IT'S NOT. YES IT'S NOT. IT WAS CONDITIONS IN THE AGENDA MEMO I THINK IS IN THE MEMO. OKAY. SO CAN I JUST SAY THAT WITH THE CONDITIONS AS OR SHALL I LIST THEM AS RECOMMENDED. YEAH. IN THE IN THE AGENDA. YES. WITH CONDITIONS AS RECOMMENDED IN THE AGENDA ITEM. I SECOND THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

WOULD IT HELP IF I GIVE YOU. YES. IF I RUN THROUGH THOSE PLEASE. SO THE CONDITION STATING THAT WE HAVE PERMEABLE PAVER PERMEABLE PAVER SYSTEM. I ASSUME YOU'RE LOOKING AT PARALLEL PARKING IN LIEU OF PERPENDICULAR PARKING WE DID RECOMMEND BECAUSE THAT'S SOME SIMILAR. THIS IS AGAIN, IT'S VERY UNIQUE. SO TO KEEP THAT CONSISTENCY. AND THEN WE WOULD ALSO INQUIRE OR REQUIRE A SWALE TO BE DESIGNED AS PART OF IT AS WELL. BECAUSE THIS DOES NOT HAVE CURB AND GUTTER. SO THERE WOULD BE A SWALE ALONG THIS SECTION AS WELL. IT WOULD BE THAT'S THAT'S TYPICAL THOUGH. BUT IF I'M SORRY, IF THERE AREN'T ANY SWALES IN THAT AREA AND YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE THIS PARTICULAR PERSON PUT A SWALE IN TO. CONVEYED AWARE OR I MEAN, IS THAT THE I JUST HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE. SUCCESS OF THIS SWALE. OKAY. AND THAT'S A CHALLENGE THAT WE'VE HAD. I THINK WE HAD THE DISCUSSIONS OH, QUITE A WHILE BACK, DISCUSSIONS ON THE SWALE RECLAMATION PROGRAM. I THINK OUR LAST DIRECTION WAS IF THERE'S NO CARBON GUTTER, WE ARE TO REQUIRE A SWALE. WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S I'M NOT TALKING. WE'RE LOOKING AT A DEEP SWALE. WE'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY A RATHER LOW DEPTH SWALE IN THIS THIS

[03:50:04]

AREA. THERE ARE MOST OF THESE PROPERTIES ALONG HERE. MOST OF THE SECTION ALONG HERE HAS BEEN IMPROVED. SOME HAVE SOMEWHAT OF A SWALE ALREADY IN THERE. AND THEN THERE'S SOME THAT ARE NOT.

BUT TYPICALLY THE THE RECOMMENDATION PREVIOUSLY. AND THAT'S THAT'S ANOTHER TOPIC HAS BEEN TO GO AHEAD. AND EVEN IF IT'S PIECE BY PIECE TO REQUIRE EACH OF THOSE APPLICANTS TO ASSURE THAT THEY'VE, THEY'VE DONE THEIR PART IN PROVIDING A SWALE IN, IN THE RIGHT OF WAY WHEN THEY'RE PERFORMING ANY WORK. SHOULD I TAKE ANOTHER STAB AT THIS OR. NO. WELL. I JUST DON'T KNOW. I'M SORRY IF PERMEABLE IS GOING TO HELP ABSORB THE WATER TO THAT PROPERTY AND AND NOT HAVE THE NEED FOR SWALE. WE'RE. BUT WE CAN LEAVE IT THAT WAY. AND THE.

I WOULD SUGGEST THAT PERMEABLE IS BETTER. PERMEABLE IS BETTER THAN WHAT THEY HAVE NOW. YEAH, EXACTLY. YES. FOR SURE. SO THE SWALE IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE EVEN WITH THE. IT'S GOING TO WASH INTO THE STREET. SO YOU GOT WATER FLOODING INTO THE STREET WITHOUT A SWALE. IT'LL HELP STABILIZE. SO YEAH. AND STORES WATER. SO I MEAN, IT'S GOING TO HELP. SHOULD I TRY IT AGAIN? MATTHEW. MR. MCCONNELL, DO I NEED TO TRY THAT AGAIN? YES. THAT'S HOPING YOU'D SAY NO.

OKAY. HERE WE GO. I'M NO BERN BARTON, I'LL TELL YOU THAT. SO YOU HAVE A YOU HAVE A MOTION.

YOU HAVE A SECOND. SO RIGHT NOW YOU'RE JUST SAYING, OH, I'D LIKE TO AMEND THAT MOTION TO INCLUDE THE REQUIREMENTS OF BEING A PERMEABLE SURFACE PERMEABLE PAVERS THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE SET UP FOR PARALLEL PARKING AND THAT THERE WILL BE A SWALE THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE PROJECT. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO THANK YOU. AGREED. OKAY, PERFECT. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER, A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE CALL THE COUNCIL.

COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ, I. COUNCILMEMBER. YES. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP YES. COUNCILMEMBER.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER KRAMER. YES. COUNCILMEMBER KRAUS YES. AND MAYOR HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU.

PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. GOOD LUCK, AND THANK YOU. YES. SO CONTINUING WITH THAT, WE'RE CONTINUING WITH THIS DISCUSSION ON THE OTHER PROPERTIES ALONG THIS CORRIDOR. WE'LL DO THAT AT ANOTHER MEETING. THANK YOU. OR RESUME UNDER CORRESPONDENCE. WE HAVE A 1230 TIME CERTAIN. THANK YOU. OKAY. SO AT THIS TIME WE HAVE A EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT CONCLUDES 14 A AND THEN GOING

[14.F) Executive Session regarding Bruner, Greg v. City of Naples, Office of the Judges of Compensation Claims, OJCC Case No. 25-029649JAW (12:30pm Time Certain).]

INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, MR. MCCONNELL WILL READ IT, BUT I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT WE'LL COME BACK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION AND BEGIN WITH 14 G. MR. YES. THAT'S CORRECT. OH, GOOD. OKAY. MR. MCCONNELL, THANK YOU. MAYOR. AT THE APRIL 1ST, 2026 PUBLIC MEETING PURSUANT TO 286 .011 SUBPARAGRAPH, A FLORIDA STATUTE CITY ATTORNEY ANNOUNCED HIS REQUEST FOR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION IN THE CASE STYLED BRUNNER, GREG VERSUS CITY OF NAPLES, OFFICE OF THE JUDGES OF COMPENSATION CLAIMS. CASE NUMBER 25029649JAW CITY COUNCIL AGREED TO MEET IN EXECUTIVE SESSION DURING ITS COUNCIL MEETING ON APRIL 15TH, 2026, WHICH IS TODAY AT APPROXIMATELY 1230 ON THE SECOND FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM OF CITY HALL.

AND A PUBLIC NOTICE WAS POSTED ON APRIL 2ND BY THE CITY CLERK. THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS EXPECTED TO LAST APPROXIMATELY ONE HOUR. DISCUSSION DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS LIMITED TO SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS OR STRATEGY RELATED TO LITIGATION EXPENDITURES. THE ENTIRE SESSION IS TRANSCRIBED BY A COURT REPORTER. FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS WILL BE PRESENT DURING THE EXECUTIVE SESSION. MAYOR TERESA HEITMANN, COUNCIL MEMBERS BILL KRAMER, LINDA BYRNE BARTON, TED BLANKENSHIP, JOHN KROL, SCOTT SCHULTZ, CITY MANAGER GARY YOUNG, CITY ATTORNEY MATTHEW MCCONNELL, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY ANDREW DICKMAN, ATTORNEY MICHAEL F2 AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM COURT REPORTING. WITH THAT, WE OKAY, E BACK FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION. AND MR. MCCONNELL, YES, THERE IS NO ACTION NEEDED OF COUNCIL AT THIS TIME. ANYTHING REQUIRED OF YOU WILL BE ADDED TO A

[14.G) A Resolution initiating Conflict Resolution Procedures Pursuant to Chapter 164, Florida Statutes, the Florida Governmental Conflict Resolution Act, regarding a Conflict between the City of Naples and the City of Naples Airport Authority; authorizing the City Attorney and City Manager to initiate Litigation; and providing for Scrivener’s Errors and an Effective Date (Supplement 1/Added Item). (Please be advised that this item is scheduled to be heard directly after the conclusion of Agenda Item 14.A.)]

FUTURE AGENDA. THANK YOU. THAT TAKES US TO ITEM 14 G. YES. THANK YOU MAYOR. A RESOLUTION INITIATING CONFLICT RESOLUTION PROCEDURES PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 164, FLORIDA STATUTE, THE FLORIDA GOVERNMENTAL CONFLICT RESOLUTION ACT REGARDING A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NAPLES AND CITY OF NAPLES. AIRPORT AUTHORITY AUTHORIZING CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER

[03:55:01]

TO INITIATE LITIGATION AND PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

SO THERE WAS THIS WAS A SUPPLEMENT ADDED, I BELIEVE, TUESDAY AFTERNOON. THERE WAS A VERSION PASSED TO YOU ALL THIS MORNING. HOWEVER, OUR OFFICE DID HAVE TO ACT QUICKLY IN DOING SO. PUTTING THIS TOGETHER, I DID PULL UP JUST SOME MINOR EDITS ON THE SCREEN THAT I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH WITH YOU, AND I WANTED THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO SEE AS WELL. WE DID GET SOME SUGGESTED EDITS BY MADAM CLERK AND I APPRECIATE HER REVIEW. PLUS, I HAD ONE CHANGE I WANTED TO MAKE VERY CLEAR IN SECTION SEVEN OF THE RESOLUTION. SO BEFORE I GO THROUGH THE RESOLUTION, I DID TAKE THE LIBERTY OF WATCHING THE BRIEF OR BRIEF PORTIONS OF THE WORKSHOP ON MONDAY. SEEMS LIKE YOU GUYS ARE HERE FOR A LONG TIME, BUT SPECIFIC TO THIS, AND I KNOW THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ASKED AND I CAN ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS FIRST, AND THEN WE CAN GO THROUGH THE RESOLUTION, BUT I'M OPEN TO DOING IT HOWEVER COUNCIL WANTS.

IF YOU WANT ME TO JUST ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS REAL QUICK AND THEN WE CAN GO THROUGH THE RESOLUTION. SURE. OKAY. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. SO ONE OF THE THINGS I HEARD WAS, DO WE HAVE TO DO THIS FOR THE STATE OR FOR THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS? AND THE ANSWER IS NO.

164 PROCESS IS SPECIFIC TO GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES, WHICH A SPECIAL DISTRICT IS INCLUDED. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE PUBLIC AND FOR COUNCIL TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT JUST FOR THIS ISSUE. THIS IS FOR ANY CLAIM. IF ONE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY IS GOING TO INITIATE LITIGATION AGAINST ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY, WHETHER IT'S OVER AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT, WHETHER IT'S A COUNTY V CITY, WHATEVER IT IS, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO GO THROUGH THIS 164 PROCESS TO SEE IF YOU CAN RESOLVE THE ISSUES FIRST. OKAY, SO IT DOES NOT APPLY TO THE STATE, DOES NOT APPLY TO THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS. ANOTHER QUESTION I HEARD WAS, YOU KNOW, PREVAILING PARTY FEES WITH THIS 164 PROCESS. UNLESS A PARTY ACTS IN BAD FAITH, WHICH WE WILL NOT DO, THERE IS NO RECOVERY OF ATTORNEY FEES. OKAY. SO UNLESS THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS SPECIFIC TO THOSE ARE REALLY THE ONES I HEARD KIND OF CONSISTENTLY THROUGH YOUR DISCUSSION. THEN I'LL GO AHEAD AND WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE CHANGES. OBVIOUSLY, YOU ALL HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY POTENTIALLY TO READ IT SINCE IT WAS PUBLISHED LAST NIGHT.

HOPEFULLY THE PUBLIC DID AS WELL, BUT THEY'RE VERY MINOR IN NATURE. SO IF YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON THE SCREEN, I'LL MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT BIGGER SO THAT MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CAN SEE.

YOU KNOW, WE LAID OUT THE HISTORY AND I APPRECIATE ANDREW'S DEEP DIVE INTO THIS BECAUSE IT'S IT'S VERY INTERESTING HOW THIS WHOLE THING CAME ABOUT. IT WAS ALL TOGETHER. BUT I WON'T GET INTO THE DETAILS HERE. I THINK THE RECITAL SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.

THESE ARE THE THESE ARE THE EDITS THE CLERK SUGGESTED, WHICH WE AGREE WITH. IT WAS KIND OF JUST MAKING A RECITAL LESS LONG, SEPARATING THE TWO, AND THEN MAKING IT CLEAR WHEN THE SPECIAL ACT WAS FILED. AGAIN, RECITALS TELL STORIES. SO WE THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO LAY OUT THE FOUNDATION OF HOW THIS BECAME AN ACT. AS WE SCROLL DOWN, NOTHING ELSE CHANGES UNTIL WE GET TO SECTION SEVEN. SO INITIALLY, THE WAY IT DRAFTED AND AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE TITLE, IT AUTHORIZES THE CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY TO INITIATE LITIGATION. HOWEVER, IT WAS MY OPINION THAT SECTION SEVEN COULD BE READ IN A WAY THAT WOULD LIMIT IT TO JUST THE 164 PROCESS. WHEN I TALK ABOUT LITIGATION, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, AND I CAN GO AHEAD AND JUST CLOSE THIS FOR A MINUTE SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT THE LANGUAGE SAYS TO GIVE YOUR CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER FLEXIBILITY. OBVIOUSLY, YOU GUYS HAVE SELECTED US FOR A REASON. WE HAVE OTHER ATTORNEYS AT PLAY, BUT IT NOW READS, CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY MANAGER ARE HEREBY AUTHORIZED TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE CITY'S INTERESTS RELATED TO THE NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, INCLUDING THE INITIATIVE INITIATION OF LITIGATION. RIGHT.

SO THERE'S NO REFERENCE TO CHAPTER 164, ETC. JUST BECAUSE I FELT LIKE I KNEW WHAT IT MEANT, BUT I DIDN'T WANT IT TO BE READ AND HAVE TO COME BACK. IF COUNCIL SO WISHES FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD AND AUTHORIZE US TO DO SO. AND THAT WAS THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE EDITS.

SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ON CHAPTER 164 PROCESS. I DO WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THOUGH, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING TO COME OUT BECAUSE IF THIS GETS APPROVED, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SEND A LETTER TO THE NAPLES AIRPORT AUTHORITY IMMEDIATELY. THIS PROCESS IS A 50 DAY MAXIMUM PROCESS. IT DOES NOT HAVE A MINIMUM DAY REQUIREMENT. RIGHT.

SO WE CAN DO IT FASTER. BUT 50 DAYS IS THE LONGEST IT COULD POTENTIALLY TAKE. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT 50 DAYS FROM TODAY, YOU'RE LOOKING AT FIRST OR SECOND WEEK IN JUNE WHERE THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE RESOLVED BY WHICH MEANS WE HAVE WE WOULD HAVE GONE THROUGH THE NEGOTIATIONS OR THE MEETINGS AND THE CONFERRAL MEETINGS WITH THE FAA. AND WE WILL HAVE BEEN SCHEDULED A JOINT MEETING WITH THE NSA, AND IT WILL BE PRESENTED IN AN AGENDA ITEM TO BOTH BOARDS FOR CONSIDERATION. I ALSO WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S POSITION IS AS WE SIT HERE. NOW, THE REASON WE'RE DOING THIS IS BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THE HOUSE BILL HAS FRUSTRATED THE PURPOSE OF THE LEASE. AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS IF YOU FRUSTRATE THE

[04:00:02]

PURPOSE OF THE LEASE, THEN THE LEASE IS NO LONGER VALID. THAT IS OUR POSITION. IN ORDER TO GO TO A COURT AND GET A JUDGE AND ARGUE, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS POSITION. RIGHT. BUT I WANT OUR POSITION TO BE CLEAR RIGHT NOW. THAT IS WHY WE ARE GOING THROUGH THIS IS BECAUSE WE BELIEVE THIS HOUSE BILL, BASED ON ALL THE HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS THAT WE'VE REVIEWED AND ALL THE RECITALS HERE, HAS FRUSTRATED THE INITIAL REASON AND PURPOSE THAT THE CITY REQUESTED THIS TO BEGIN WITH. EVERYTHING WAS TIED TOGETHER. A SPECIAL ACT WAS DRAFTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY. AT THE TIME IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE STATE. THE LEASE WAS AGREED TO. ALL OF THIS HAPPENED AT ONE TIME. THE REASON BEING IS BECAUSE THE CITY BELIEVED IT WOULD ALWAYS HAVE THAT POWER OVER ITS DEPENDENT SPECIAL DISTRICT. THE MOMENT THAT GOES AWAY, SO DOES THE LEASE, AND THAT'S OUR POSITION. SO I WON'T GET INTO ANY FURTHER LEGAL STRATEGY. BUT I DID WANT TO MAKE THAT POINT VERY CLEAR, WHICH IS WHY WE BELIEVE WE HAVE TO INITIATE THIS. CHAPTER 164 PROCESS. IT IS A REQUIREMENT IS NOT VOLUNTARY. IT'S WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO GO TO THE NEXT STEP. SO WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. I HAVE KRAMER, I MITCH MCCONNELL, I'D JUST LIKE TO CLARIFY BECAUSE I'VE HAD A NUMBER OF PEOPLE FROM THE COMMUNITY SAY WE HAVE NO BUSINESS SUING THE NRA. WE ARE NOT SUING THE NRA. WE'RE TRYING TO WORK COLLABORATIVELY WITH THEM. IS THAT THE CASE? THE NRA WILL BE A PARTY TO A LAWSUIT IF THIS DOES NOT WORK OUT RIGHT. BUT SHOULD COUNCIL WISH TO MOVE FORWARD? BUT THROUGH THE 164 PROCESS, WE'RE NOT SUING THE NRA IS THAT IT IS A PREREQUISITE FOR SUIT, ALTHOUGH THE STATUTE DOES ALLOW FOR SUIT TO BE FILED FIRST AND THEN THE 164 PROCESS TO OCCUR. BUT THAT'S KIND OF A HARD QUESTION TO ANSWER BECAUSE BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM, WHICH IS LIKE, WE GET THAT THIS WAS DONE BY THE STATE, BUT YOU CAN'T JUST TURN AROUND AND SUE THE STATE. I WISH IT WAS THAT EASY, BUT IT'S NOT. THE NRA WOULD BE THE PARTY ON THE OTHER SIDE BECAUSE THEY ARE OUR TENANT.

GOT IT. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS. BARTON. MATTHEW. THIS PROCESS DOES NOT PREVENT US FROM TAKING STEPS NECESSARY FOR A POTENTIAL INJUNCTION. MEANING THAT THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO WAIT TILL THIS PROCESS IS OVER. WE DON'T WE'RE NOT GOING TO MISS A POTENTIAL WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY HERE BY BY GOING THROUGH THIS 164 PROCESS. NO. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I NEEDED TO HEAR. OKAY. SO THAT WITH THAT, WE HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY TO EVEN FILE SUIT. NOW IF WE WANT TO, IF YOU DECIDE TO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS STARTING. YES. BLANKENSHIP. SO TO FURTHER CLARIFY WHAT I THINK YOU HEARD WITH THIS SECTION SEVEN, YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO SUE. WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THE 164 PROCESS WITH A STATE AGENCY OR THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, AND YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SUE A STATE AGENCY IF SO DESIRED OR REQUIRED. SEPARATE. YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT ON THE 164 PROCESS WITH THE AIRPORT TO BE DONE. BEFORE YOU CONSIDER ONE OF THESE ACTIONS WITH A DIFFERENT PARTY. THAT IS CORRECT. THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES. HOWEVER, WE WILL HAVE PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS OFFLINE ON WHAT EXACTLY OUR LEGAL STRATEGY IS. SURE. BUT YES, YOU ARE CORRECT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE 164 PROCESS FOR SOMEONE LIKE COMMERCE OR THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, ETC. ONLY FOR ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY, LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY, RIGHT? CORRECT. OR COUNTY. SO THE STATUTE LAYS OUT THE DEFINITION OF GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY LEVEL, NOT STATE LEVEL, NOT STATE DEPARTMENT, BUT COUNTY, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, CITIES, SPECIAL DISTRICTS, INDEPENDENT DISTRICTS, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE WATER DISTRICTS, ETC. OKAY, THANKS. SURE. WOULD THIS ALSO INCLUDE SUPERVISOR ELECTIONS? BLAZER. DO WE HAVE TO SUE HER AS WELL? BECAUSE THERE'S NOW A SECOND CANDIDATE THAT HAS FILED FOR ONE OF THE FIVE POSITIONS. SO WHAT THIS RESOLUTION DOES IS AUTHORIZE OUR OFFICE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CITY MANAGER, TO DO WHAT WE BELIEVE WE NEED TO IN FIGHTING THIS TO PROTECT THE CITY'S INTEREST OF THE NAPLES AIRPORT, WHETHER THAT INCLUDES THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS OR A STATE AGENCY. I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT YET, BUT IT MAY.

AND IF I DID KNOW THE ANSWER RESPECTFULLY, I WOULDN'T DISCLOSE IT. THANK YOU. YOU NEED FROM US. I WAS JUST PROCEDURALLY SPEAKING. WHAT DO YOU NEED FROM US IF WE WANT TO

[04:05:07]

APPROVE THIS? BECAUSE WE AND OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD BE THIS AMENDED VERSION, BUT BECAUSE WE INCLUDED SECTION SEVEN, I WOULD ONLY NEED ONE MOTION APPROVING THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED.

RIGHT NOW WITH THESE CHANGES. AND THEN WE WOULD GO THROUGH A ROLL CALL VOTE. I DO BELIEVE WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT THOUGH, SO I WOULD WAIT FOR THAT. I MADAM CLERK, DO I HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT? OKAY, I'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. MR. NASH. HE HAS TO STEP UP, I. MR. CABRERA THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. MAYOR, SAID JOSE CABRERA. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS OF THE NAPLES JET CENTER. BOARD MEMBER OF RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT, NAPLES AND VICE PRESIDENT OF THE FLORIDA AVIATION BUSINESS ASSOCIATION. I WANTED TO START ACTUALLY ON A POSITIVE NOTE.

IT'S BEEN ACTUALLY REWARDING TO WATCH LEGISLATIVE PROCESS WORK THE WAY IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE.

REPRESENTATIVE BILL WAS THOUGHTFUL, TRANSPARENT AND DEBATED AND OPEN. MANY OF US IN THE COMMUNITY HAVE KNOWN ABOUT IT SINCE THE EARLY MEETINGS. WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO FOLLOW IT AND AS A AS IT PROCEEDED IN TALLAHASSEE, THE BILL PASSED NEARLY UNANIMOUSLY THROUGH THE HOUSE, THE SENATE, AND THEN IT WAS SIGNED BY TWO INTO LAW BY THE GOVERNOR. THIS PAST APRIL 6TH SHOWS THAT LEGISLATION REFLECTS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE, NOT JUST LOCALLY, BUT ACROSS THE STATE. LET ME BE CLEAR. IT'S BOTH SHOCKING AND FRANKLY, FRUSTRATING. NOW TO HEAR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE CITY POTENTIAL CHALLENGING OR TRYING TO INVALIDATE THE LAW AFTER IT HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH THAT PROCESS, PASSING WITH FLYING COLORS AND SIGNED. IN PRACTICAL TERMS, OUR TAXPAYERS RESOURCES, POTENTIALLY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS COULD BE SPENT FIGHTING THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND THE LEGISLATURE. EVEN THOUGH THIS BILL RECEIVES SUCH A BROAD SUPPORT FROM OUR CONSTITUENTS AND YOUR REPRESENTATIVES. THAT'S A SERIOUS STEP. IT RAISES CONCERNS. ARE YOU EXPECTING THE OUTCOME OF A DEMOCRATIC PROCESS? ARE YOU RESPECTING THE OUTCOME OF THEIR DEMOCRATIC PROCESS, OR ARE YOU TRYING TO OVERRIDE IT BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE THE RESULTS? THIS LEGISLATION GIVES MORE PEOPLE A VOICE. IT EXPANDS PARTICIPATION. THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE EMBRACING, NOT RESISTING. FLORIDA HAS MADE IT VERY CLEAR THROUGH STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE ACTIONS THAT CERTAIN AREAS, ESPECIALLY THOSE INVOLVING CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND REGIONAL ASSETS, ARE SUBJECT TO STATE PREEMPTION. THAT INCLUDES LEGISLATION LIKE SENATE BILLS TWO, 50 TO 80 OR 250 AND 180, WHICH GENERALLY PROHIBIT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM ADOPTING OR ENFORCING REGULATIONS THAT ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE OR MORE BURDENSOME THAN STATE LAW IN KEY AREAS LIKE DEVELOPMENT, PERMITTING AND THE USE OF PROPERTY. IMPORTANTLY, THOSE LAWS REMAIN STRONG. EFFORTS TO ROLL THEM BACK OR WEAKEN THEM HAVE FAILED. FLORIDA LAW AND FEDERAL LAW HAVE ALWAYS AND CONTINUE TO SERVE AS A BLOCK TO THE CITY'S EFFORTS TO OVERSTEP ITS AUTHORITY, CONTROL, AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT AND OPERATIONS. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS IN FULL CONTEXT, THE THE ISSUE IS NOT JUST WHETHER A PARTICULAR APPROACH MIGHT WORK, IT'S WHETHER IT IS LEGAL AND PERMISSIBLE AT ALL. I WOULD STRONGLY URGE YOU TO RECONSIDER ANY PATH TOWARDS LITIGATION, AND INSTEAD FOCUS ON WORKING WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK THAT HAS NOW BEEN LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED.

SAVE THE TAXPAYERS MONEY AND TIME. CONCENTRATE ALL THE THINGS THAT SHOULD BE YOUR PRIORITY. AND THIS BOARD HAS DISCUSSED MANY TIMES A LOT OF THINGS THAT REQUIRE MORE EFFICIENCY IN THIS CITY. CONCENTRATE ON THOSE THINGS, NOT UNLAWFUL THINGS. THANK YOU.

OKAY, I'LL CALL SEAN NASH AGAIN. BUT HE IS NOT PRESENT. HE'S OUTSIDE. SHOULD I? OKAY. OKAY.

SO. WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ, I'VE GOT A VARIETY OF QUESTIONS, COMMENTS AND CONCERNS. I CAN SPEAK TO THE. THE ONLY ITEM I DON'T LIKE IS SECTION SEVEN. AS A ELECTED MEMBER OF COUNCIL, I BELIEVE I'M A FIDUCIARY. I THINK WE'RE ALL FIDUCIARIES FOR THE RESIDENTS. AND AS SUCH, WE HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN EVEN A BALLPARK NUMBER OF WHAT LITIGATION WILL COST. PASSIONS ARE RUNNING VERY HIGH IN SOME PARTS OF TOWN. AND I CAN SAY

[04:10:04]

THIS, I WASN'T AT THE SESSION WHERE VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP WAS IN MY VERY BUILDING LAST EVENING TALKING TO RESIDENTS, AND I WOULD LET YOU, IF YOU WOULD TAKE A MOMENT JUST TO EXPLAIN THE SENTIMENT IN THE NORTH PART, WHERE WHERE WE LIVE. WHAT DID YOU HEAR FROM THE RESIDENTS THERE IN REGARDS TO AIRPORT, WATER PARK AND IN GENERAL, WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO EXPOUND ON THAT? SURE. OKAY. I'M ASKING YOU TO DO IT NOW BECAUSE I'M GOING TO CONTINUE AFTER THAT. YES. YESTERDAY I SPOKE BY INVITATION AT THE BOARD MEETING ABOUT PRIORITIES FOR THE COUNCIL. SINCE THE ELECTION. I WENT THROUGH A NUMBER OF MY PERSONAL PRIORITIES AND WHAT I THOUGHT THE COUNCIL PRIORITIES WERE AND ANSWERED QUESTIONS. I MENTIONED THE AIRPORT AS ONE OF THE PRIORITIES. AND THIS DISCUSSION THAT WE ARE HAVING TODAY, AND IT IS FAIR TO SAY THERE WAS MIXED OPINION. SOME PEOPLE DON'T FAVOR DOING ANYTHING, BUT THEY ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED IN THAT CONVERSATION THAT THEY LIVE IN THE NORTHERN PART OF THE CITY, AND THEY'RE NOT UNDER THE FLIGHT PATHS. THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY DO UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS OF PEOPLE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE CITY THAT DO LIVE UNDER THE FLIGHT PATHS. THEY RECOGNIZE IT WASN'T THEIR PROBLEM, SO TO SPEAK, SO THEY DIDN'T WANT TO SEE LITIGATION.

THEY'D RATHER FOCUS ON THINGS THAT DO IMPACT THEM, LIKE THE WATER PARK. SO THERE WAS NO VOTE. THIS IS JUST INDIVIDUAL SPEAKERS DURING THAT SESSION. AND I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY I'VE HEARD A VARIETY OF OPINIONS FROM ACROSS NAPLES, ACROSS THE DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE THAT WE ALL HAVE. SO YES, SOME PEOPLE ARE STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF LITIGATION. SOME PEOPLE ARE STRONGLY OPPOSED TO LITIGATION. SOME PEOPLE ARE CLUELESS ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON. SO THERE'S A VARIETY OF OPINIONS. AND AND MY ESTIMATION AND IT'S FALLING TO US TO DECIDE WHAT THE NEXT STEPS ARE. THANK YOU. SO I LIVE IN THAT BUILDING AND I TALK WITH MY NEIGHBORS. I SAY, YOU'RE ON CITY COUNCIL. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS? AND I SAID, WELL, I HAVE MAJOR QUESTIONS ON THE COST. I HAVE NO I'VE SEEN NO NUMBERS. I'VE HEARD NO CONVERSATION ABOUT COSTS. AND DUE TO DO AN EFFECTIVE COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF ANY INVESTMENT ONE MUST MAKE, THAT REQUIRES A LOT OF DUE DILIGENCE. WAS PRETTY GOOD AT THAT. DUE DILIGENCE ON INVESTMENTS MEANS YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM EVERY DIFFERENT ANGLE, AND WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM RETURN YOU WANT VERSUS THE RISK YOU WANT IN RETURN FOR THE REWARD. YOU'RE SEEKING. THE BEST THAT WE WOULD LIKELY ACHIEVE WOULD BE VACATING WITH THE STATE DID AND THE LEASE BE RENEGOTIATED AND LIFE WOULD GO ON. THE WORST THAT WOULD HAPPEN IS WE WOULD GET SLAPPED AROUND. I DON'T KNOW WHICH JURISDICTION THAT HASN'T BEEN DISCUSSED YET, WHERE THE CASE WILL BE FILED, OBVIOUSLY ONE IN COLLIER AND COULD BE ONE UP IN WHERE THE LEGISLATURE IS. THESE ARE OPTIONS THAT ARE OUT THERE AND COST MATTERS. HOW MUCH ARE WE WILLING TO SPEND ONCE WE GO IN? I HEARD A LIMIT. LET'S GO IN FOR 250 OR 500,000 AND THEN REEVALUATE. MY EXPERIENCE WITH THOSE TYPES OF ENDEAVORS ARE ONCE YOU GO DOWN THE ROAD OF PAYING ANY MONEY, IT'S GOING TO BE THE POINT OF NO RETURN. YOU CAN'T GO BACK. YOU'RE ALREADY PREGNANT. RUN IT OUT. WE ARE RIGHT NOW, CURRENTLY IN THE THE APPROPRIATIONS PHASE WITH THE LEGISLATURE. I HAVE SPOKEN WITH SENATOR PASSIDOMO. I'VE SPOKEN WITH LAUREN MELO, THE REPRESENTATIVE, MELO, ALL THE REPS INVOLVED. AND THEY'RE SAYING THEY DON'T LIKE ANY OF THIS. AND THEY WERE EVEN MORE CHAGRINED WHEN THEY WERE TOLD THAT A MEMBER OF COUNCIL WANTS TO CRIMINALLY INVESTIGATE THEM, BECAUSE SENATOR WATCHES THIS, HAS A STAFF PERSON WATCHING US RIGHT NOW, AND THEY'RE REAL TIME FEEDING FROM WHAT WE'RE SAYING. AND SO THEY WERE EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTED WITH THE SUGGESTIONS ABOUT INVESTIGATIONS INTO CRIMINAL ILLEGALITIES. I PASS NO JUDGMENT ON ANY OF THIS. I'M JUST AN ARBITER TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL THE RESIDENTS IN THE CITY OF NAPLES. I READILY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THE OLD NAPLES ASSOCIATION HAS DELUGED ME SO MUCH WITH PHONE CALLS, LETTERS LIKE I'VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE. IT'S VERY WELL WELL-ORGANIZED MACHINE HERE, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I KNOCKED ON 2100 DOORS CAMPAIGNING, PRIMARILY FOCUSING NORTH OF THE

[04:15:07]

GOLF COURSE, BECAUSE WHEN I WENT DOWN INTO OMA, I KNOW THAT WAS ON FRIENDLY TERMS BECAUSE OF WHO'S RUNNING ONI, AND THAT'S UNFORTUNATE. BUT THE THINGS I HEARD ABOUT AND MAYOR, YOU COMMENTED EARLIER TO ME WHEN I SAID TRAFFIC GROWTH AND VARIANCES, YOU SAID, WELL, THAT'S DUE TO THE AIRPORT. WELL, I DON'T QUITE AGREE WITH YOUR ASSESSMENT AND BREAK DOWN THAT THAT'S WHAT IT'S DUE TO. I DON'T THINK PEOPLE GET OFF THEIR BOMBARDIER'S AND JUMP AROUND AND GO JUST DRIVING DOWN OUR STREETS. I THINK THEY HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO. AND THEY WOULD HEAD TO DIFFERENT PARTS OF TOWN, BUT WITHOUT KNOWING AND NOT HAVING A CLUE WHAT THIS IS GOING TO COST IN THE STRONG OPINIONS, THE EMOTIONAL OPINIONS. WHEN YOU MAKE AN INVESTMENT, YOU CANNOT LOOK AT IT EMOTIONALLY. YOU'VE GOT TO LOOK AT IT. IT CAN'T GO DOWN.

IT CAN GO UP. WHAT ARE THE ODDS OF EACH? WHAT ARE THE FORCES WORKING AGAINST YOU? THE VOTE WAS 112 OR EXCUSE ME, 113 TO 1, WHATEVER IT WAS, ONE VOTE. AND IT WAS A LEGISLATOR FROM, I BELIEVE, ORLANDO WHO PRESSED THE WRONG BUTTON. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ONE, JUST A WHITEWASH.

ZERO. I MEAN, NOBODY AGAINST IT. THE SENATE 38 NOTHING. THOSE ARE POWERFUL FORCES WHO DETERMINE OUR APPROPRIATIONS. THEN YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE JUDICIARY. YOU KNOW, THEY COULD GET A BEE IN THEIR BONNET AND PENALIZE US FOR WASTING THEIR TIME, WHICH IS WHAT THEY WOULD SAY, BECAUSE THE STATE HAS MADE A DECISION. WE DON'T AGREE WITH THE DECISION THEY'VE MADE. I DON'T AGREE WITH THE DECISION THEY'VE MADE. HOWEVER, I CANNOT BE EMOTIONAL ABOUT THIS LIKE SOME ARE. AND AS AS VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP VERY ELOQUENTLY SAID, THERE ARE PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS, BUT IT SEEMS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF LITIGATION ARE MUCH MORE QUIET THAN THE ONES THAT ARE BEATING THE DRUMS FOR WAR. AND I TRY TO DO SOME OF THE MATH ON THIS. AND WE'VE GOT ALMOST 20,000 RESIDENTS IN THE CITY. IF THIS GETS TO A MILLION, THAT'S $500 PER INDIVIDUAL. IF IT GOES TO 2 MILLION, YOU'RE LOOKING AT $1,000 FOR EVERY RESIDENT IN THE CITY. WE HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS. WE HAVE ALL SORTS OF NEEDS IN THIS TOWN, AND SPENDING IT ON THIS. WHILE I DON'T DISPUTE THE NOISE IS A PAIN IN THE BUTT AND I THINK THEY'VE AMELIORATED IT. BUT WHAT WAS POSITED FORTH BY ONE OF THE ELECTED OFFICIALS I MENTIONED EARLIER WAS ACCEPT IT, LIVE WITH IT FOR A YEAR AND COME BACK AND LET'S MAKE CHANGES. I KNOW THAT WOULD LIKELY BE UNACCEPTABLE TO THE STRONG PEOPLE, THE STRONG MINDED FOLKS THAT ARE AGAINST IT. SO I AM JUST TRYING TO FIND A WAY TO QUANTIFY THE RISK REWARD RELATIONSHIP TO HOW MUCH MONEY ARE WE WILLING TO PUT INTO THIS, KNOWING FULL WELL WE COULD LOSE AND FURTHER ALIENATE MORE GOVERNMENTAL BODIES BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A FRIEND OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT, THE ELECTED OFFICIALS IN TALLAHASSEE. WE DON'T HAVE ANY GOOD. IN FACT, WE WERE SHARING A LOBBYIST WITH OUR COUNTY. SO YOU COULD SAY NO, BUT IT'S THERE. THERE ARE GOVERNMENTAL BODIES THAT ARE WATCHING US, AND IT SEEMS LIKE NAPLES IS ALWAYS RIGHT AND EVERYBODY ELSE IS ALWAYS WRONG. AND THAT'S THE REPUTATION WE HAVE ACROSS THE STATE, RIGHT OR WRONG. AGAIN, I'M NOT PASSING JUDGMENTS. I'M ASKING QUESTIONS. THAT IS, MY JOB IS TO ASK QUESTIONS. AND UNLESS I CAN GET SOME SATISFACTORY ANSWER, I DON'T FEEL THAT SEVEN WOULD WOULD FLY WITH A GOOD NUMBER OF RESIDENTS OF THIS CITY. I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S THERE UNTIL WE GET A FIRMER GRIP ON THAT. I AGREE THAT I WANT TO GET INTO THE PROCESS OF MEDIATION. I THINK WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO APPROACH THAT OPEN MINDED AND WORK WITH THE MEDIATORS AND ASSESS AFTER WE'VE HAD THAT MEDIATION OPPORTUNITY, THE RISK REWARDS, AND LOOK AT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS, BECAUSE THESE NUMBERS CAN GET REALLY DAUNTING REALLY FAST. AND IT COULD BE AN OUTCOME THAT WE DON'T WANT ON A VARIETY OF FRONTS. SO THOSE ARE MY SERIOUS CONCERNS. AND I WOULD I WOULD AGREE WITH THIS, EXCEPT LET'S TAKE OUT SECTION SEVEN FOR NOW. THANK YOU. I WANT TO SAY A FEW THINGS TO YOU. I'LL RESPOND, BUT I'LL LET KRAMER AND THEN GO. THANK YOU MAYOR, I JUST THIS IS AREN'T NECESSARILY MY STATEMENTS, BUT JUST KIND OF A QUESTION, ANSWERING A QUESTION OR RESPONDING TO THAT ONE IS WE HAVE HAD FRIENDS IN REPRESENTING US IN THE STATE, AND KATHLEEN PASSIDOMO HAS DONE

[04:20:03]

IT FOR MOST OF HER ADULT LIFE. SHE WAS PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE, NOT JUST HER. LOTS OF LOTS OF FOLKS HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB FOR A LONG, LONG TIME. AND BEEN WELL REPRESENTED. AND THAT'S.

AND WE'VE BEEN IN THE APPROPRIATIONS HAVE BEEN PRETTY REMARKABLE. SO THAT PART IS TRUE. AND THAT WHICH IS WHY PROBABLY SOME FOLKS TAKE UMBRAGE WITH BEING CHARACTERIZED DOING SOMETHING CRIMINAL BECAUSE THEY WORKED SO HARD FOR SO LONG. IT HELPS SO MUCH. I TOO AM INTERESTED IN. AND I DON'T BELIEVE WE WE COULD BECOME SUNK COST FALLACY FOLKS, BUT WE DON'T HAVE TO BE. WE'RE. WE'RE NOT PREGNANT. WE CAN SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND 50,000 $100,000 ON THIS, GET THIS BALL ROLLING. AND THEN BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GET FAR ENOUGH DOWN THE ROAD TO KNOW WHAT IT ENTAILS ANYWAY, AND THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE SOME DEGREE OF EFFORT. AND SO. I DON'T WANT TO I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT'S ALL OR NOTHING. AND I ALSO AGREE WHOLEHEARTEDLY. I'M ARBITER THAT THAT'S ME TOO. IN THE END, ON MY SIDE OF THE BALANCE SHEET, SINCE I, YOU KNOW, FOR YEARS. AND ONE OF THE REASONS I RAN FOR THIS COUNCIL WAS BECAUSE THE DOLLAR A YEAR RENT IS ABSURD. AND EVERYBODY THAT'S WORKED AT THE FOR THE NRA WOULD TELL YOU THE SAME THING. AND SO THAT'S THE POSITIVE PART HERE. IF WE CAN OPEN THE LEASE AND RENEGOTIATE THE LEASE IN A WAY THAT THEY LIKE AND WE LIKE, WE'RE NOT FAR APART ON ANY OF IT. IN FACT, YOU CAN. I'VE READ INTO THE RECORD THE LETTER FROM OWEN, A GLOWINGLY PRAISING THE AIRPORT AND ITS MANAGEMENT. THEY ARE APOLOGISTS FOR THE AIRPORT AT THAT AT THAT POINT. FANTASTIC. SO I'M INTERESTED IN MOVING FORWARD AND FIND A WAY TO DO THAT TO MONETIZE THE AIRPORT, WHICH I'VE SAID FROM DAY ONE. AND I THINK WE CAN DO IT, WHICH WHICH WOULD INCLUDE OTHER THINGS, WHICH WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, WHERE WE HAD TERMS THAT WERE NEVER EVEN DEFINED IN, IN THE LAND USE PART. I MEAN, JUST GETTING CONSISTENCY IN THAT, GETTING A FIRM FOUNDATION, A REAL LEASE. I WILL SAY IF YOU READ THE LEASE, IT'S, IT'S LAUGHABLE. IT REALLY IS. SO IF THIS MOVES US TOWARDS THAT, I'M ALL FOR IT. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT A SUNK COST FALLACY GUY. LIKE I'M NOT GOING TO GET CAUGHT UP IN IT AND SAY, WELL, I'M ONLY I'M THAT FAR IN NOW. WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO SEE IT TO THE END. BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT. I'M NOT GOING TO BE EMOTIONAL ABOUT IT. I'M TRYING TO MAKE GET THIS THING IS SOMETHING THAT EVERYONE CAN LIVE WITH. AND I THINK, I DON'T CARE WHO YOU TALK TO ABOUT LITIGATE, DON'T LITIGATE EVERY CITIZEN. IF WE SAY, HEY, WE CAN COME UP WITH SOMEWHERE BETWEEN, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S ALMOST, SAY 5 MILLION, 10 MILLION, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY A YEAR THAT WILL SUPPORT RESILIENCY IN OUR CITY. WELL, THAT WHO'S, WHO'S NOT FOR THAT. SHOW ME THEM. I THINK EVERYBODY COULD AGREE TO THAT. AND IF THIS IS THE NEXT STEP TOWARDS THAT, THEN AGAIN, I'M ALL FOR IT. THANK YOU. CARL. YEAH. I WOULD SAY TO COUNCILMAN SCHULTZ, YOU HAVE $1 BILLION ASSET IN YOUR PORTFOLIO. WHAT WOULD YOU PAY TO DEFEND THAT? IS THAT WORTH DEFENDING? IF YOU HAD $1 BILLION ASSET IN YOUR PORTFOLIO? AND SECONDLY. THIS IS A GREAT ASSET. THIS THIS ASSET, IF IT'S TRULY BECOMES A MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, AGAIN, THOSE COSTS COULD BE RECOVERED. MAYBE IN THE SHORT, VERY SHORT TERM, IF THE IF, IF THERE'S A MANAGEMENT RESTRUCTURING OF THAT AIRPORT, THAT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST PROFITABLE PRIVATE AIRPORTS IN THE COUNTRY. THIRDLY, AS FAR AS INVESTIGATIONS GO, IF THIS GOES TO TRIAL, THEY'LL BE INVESTIGATIONS. YOU KNOW, ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. AND THAT'S PART OF PART OF LIFE. NO ONE HAS A NO ONE'S ABOVE THE LAW. NO ONE'S GOT A FREE PASS ON THAT. THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. NOW.

EVERYBODY WOULD LOVE TO SOLVE THIS AMICABLY. YES. THAT'S WHAT WE WERE HOPING THAT IT NEVER GOT TO THIS POINT. BUT IT'S A SHAME. IT'S A SHAME THAT WE'RE WASTING EFFORT, TIME, MONEY, YOU KNOW, TO BE DOING THIS. I'M FRUSTRATED WITH THAT TOO. BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO FACE REALITY.

SO THIS IS WHERE WE ARE. BARTON. COUNCILMAN SCHULTZ, I AGREE WITH YOU. YOU KNOW, THE COST IS PARAMOUNT. IT'S IT'S NOT IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN'T BE TAKEN INTO THE EQUATION. AND IF IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, I MEAN, I'M GOING TO TRY TO SUMMARIZE REAL QUICK IN A SHORTER VERSION OF WHAT YOU SAID. PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I SAY PUT ANY WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH. WHAT I'M HEARING FROM YOU IS THAT YOU BELIEVE THAT THE 164 PROCESS THAT WE'RE PRIMARILY DISCUSSING TODAY AND GETTING ATTEMPTING TO GET APPROVAL ON PROCEEDING WITH IS IMPORTANT. YOUR CONCERN, THOUGH, IS SECTION SEVEN IN THAT IT ALLOWS THE OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS

[04:25:09]

NECESSARY TO PROTECT THE CITY'S INTERESTS RELATED TO THE NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, INCLUDING THE INITIATION OF LITIGATION AND. YOUR CONCERN THERE IS. CAN THE ATTORNEY, BASED ON THAT.

SECTION SEVEN, TAKE ACTIONS THAT ARE GOING TO FORCE US. I SAY US BEING REPRESENTATIVES OF THE CITY, FORCE THE CITY INTO A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE SPENDING MONEY WITHOUT APPROVAL, IS THAT I MEAN, AGAIN, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT. OKAY. AND MATTHEW, SO MY QUESTION TO YOU NOW THEN IS IN REFERENCE TO SECTION SEVEN, AND I UNDERSTAND I'M READING THAT I SEE THAT THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU THAT CONCERNS YOU CAN YOU. MATTHEW, DO YOU HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW MAYBE WE. OR IS THAT IS THAT LANGUAGE? DOES THAT OPEN UP SOME TYPE OF CHECKBOOK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO BE ABLE TO START, YOU KNOW, WILLY NILLY FILING LAWSUITS RIGHT AND LEFT AND THEREFORE FORCING THE CITY TO SPEND MONEY IN REFERENCE TO LITIGATION THAT MAYBE WE AS A COUNCIL WOULD DECIDE THAT WE DON'T WANT TO PURSUE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT THAT LANGUAGE IS DOING OR NOT. COULD YOU COULD YOU MAYBE HELP SOME CLARITY, HELP GIVE SOME CLARITY ON THAT? SURE. THANK YOU. AND IF COUNCIL WANTS, WE CAN GO BACK TO THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS INITIALLY PASSED OUT TODAY, RIGHT. THAT'S SPECIFIC TO 164.

OKAY. I MEAN, WE CAN ALSO DO IT NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT IF YOU FEEL BETTER, BUT YOU KNOW, CITY MANAGER MENTIONED IT ON MONDAY IN OUR SPECIALIZED LEGAL SERVICES. I MEAN, THERE'S GOING TO BE A BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT COMES BACK ALREADY BASED ON WHAT WE SPENT ON LOBBYISTS, ANDREW BARR, JAMIE COLE, ETC. THAT YOU GUYS ARE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO APPROVE IN MAY, RIGHT, TO, TO INCREASE THAT BUDGET, WHICH IS NOT GOING TO BE INCREASED. AND DEFINITELY IT'S GOING TO BE INCREASED IN NUMBER. AND IF WE GO PAST THAT NUMBER, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME BACK AGAIN AND ASK FOR ANOTHER BUDGET INCREASE. SO I DON'T WANT TO SAY IT'S AN OPEN CHECKBOOK BECAUSE IT'S NOT. YEAH. BUT IF IT FEELS IF YOU ALL FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE ADDING THIS LANGUAGE THAT WAS CURRENTLY IN THERE, PASSED OUT TO YOU TODAY. THAT'S FINE.

THAT'S FINE AS WELL. AND WE CAN ALSO INCLUDE A NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT. EVEN THOUGH THE BUDGET HASN'T BEEN PRESENTED YET, WE STILL HAVE SUFFICIENT FUNDS IN THAT IN THAT FUND. I MEAN, WHAT I CERTAINLY DON'T WANT TO DO IS HAMSTRING OUR PROFESSIONALS BECAUSE, BY THE WAY, WE DEFER TO YOU. THAT'S WHY YOU SIT UP HERE WITH US FOR EVERY SINGLE MEETING. THAT'S THAT'S WHY YOUR POSITION IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF YOUR EXPERTISE AND EXPERTISE, LEGAL EXPERTISE YOU BRING TO THE TABLE THAT WE DON'T HAVE AS A AS A BODY SITTING HERE. AND THEREFORE, WE, WE, WE DEFER TO YOU FOR YOUR, YOUR LEGAL EXPERTISE. AND WHAT I DON'T WANT TO DO IS PUT LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT'S GOING TO HAMSTRING YOU TO THE POINT THAT YOU'RE NOT CAPABLE OF DOING YOUR JOB EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I ALSO DON'T WANT TO HAVE LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT'S SO VAGUE THAT THAT IT OPENS UP THE POSSIBILITY OR EVEN THE POSSIBILITY OF, OF AN INTERPRETATION OF AN OPEN CHECKBOOK. SO I, AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO, TO PUT LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT THAT PREVENTS YOU FROM BEING ABLE TO DO YOUR JOB ON BEHALF OF US AND IN A PROPER MANNER. AND I ASSUME THAT THERE'S PROBABLY SOME TYPE OF LANGUAGE THAT, THAT, THAT WE CAN PUT IN THERE THAT WOULD GIVE US THAT WOULD GIVE COUNCILMAN SCHULTZ AND OTHERS THAT MIGHT HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS. THE THE COMFORT LEVEL THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR. BUT AGAIN, I MEAN, IF IT'S A, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH TO KNOW ENOUGH FROM THE STANDPOINT OF I DON'T KNOW IF IF THE NOT TO EXCEED $50,000, IS THAT ENOUGH FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO PUT IN, YOU KNOW, APPLY FOR OTHER LITIGATION ISSUES AND, AND DO YOUR JOB? OR IS THAT NUMBER 100,000 OR IS IT 25,000? I DON'T LIKE I SAID, I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH TO KNOW ENOUGH. SO I'D NEED GUIDANCE AS TO WHAT YOU THINK MAY BE A, A STOP NUMBER WOULD BE. AND THEN WE COULD SEE IF WE AS A BODY FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THAT NUMBER. BUT AGAIN, I DON'T EVEN KNOW ENOUGH TO, TO SUGGEST A NUMBER. SO I WOULD NEED, I WOULD NEED DIRECTION AND GUIDANCE FROM YOU IN REFERENCE TO THAT AS WELL. WELL, IF I COULD TO BURNS POINT ON AGAIN. I'LL JUST SAY IT, ONE OF THE BIGGEST BENEFITS TO THIS AND TO I DON'T CARE WHO WE WOULD LITIGATE AGAINST, IS THAT WE GET EXECUTIVE SESSION AND THEN WE CAN ACTUALLY STRATEGIZE AND WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT COSTS, WHAT AND WHAT WE WANT TO DO. SO THAT'S A MASSIVE LEVER. AND THAT'S GOT TO BE ON THE BALANCE SHEET SOMEWHERE. WHAT THAT'S WORTH ACTUALLY IN PRIVATE, FIGURE THIS THING OUT.

AND ALONG THOSE LINES, WE'RE NOT DUE TO MEET AGAIN FOR THREE WEEKS. SO IF WE DON'T GIVE THEM ANY FLEXIBILITY TO DEAL WITH THIS AND WE DON'T, WE MAKE THEM WAIT THREE WEEKS, WE'VE LOST VALUABLE TIME IN THIS PROCESS. YEAH. SO I WOULD LIKE TO GET THE ATTORNEY'S OPINION ON HOW MUCH WE HAVE SPENT EITHER NOW OR LATER. DO YOU AN ESTIMATE OF WHAT WE'VE SPENT ALREADY IN RELATION TO THIS? AND THEN WHEN COULD YOU OR CAN YOU GIVE US SOME ESTIMATION TO COST? SO IN

[04:30:01]

THIS FISCAL YEAR, WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK. BUT THE INITIAL CONTRACT WITH ANDREW BARR WAS FOR 35,000. AND I BELIEVE WE ARE AT OR ABOUT TO EXCEED THAT. SO WE'RE COMING BACK FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THAT. AS YOU'LL AS YOU'LL RECALL, FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE HERE, THE BUDGET THAT YOU APPROVED INCLUDED THE CITY ATTORNEY BUDGET, PLUS SPECIALIZED LEGAL COUNSEL. THAT NUMBER WAS 150, I BELIEVE, ON MY NUMBERS THAT I RAN THIS MORNING WERE RIGHT AT ROUGHLY 70 LEFT IN THAT BUDGET. AGAIN, IT'S BEEN OUR PRACTICE TO KIND OF THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF PLACES CLOSED THAT HAD OUTSIDE COUNSEL. WE HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN SPENDING AS MUCH THIS YEAR, WHICH IS A GOOD THING, BUT THAT'S THE ROUGH NUMBER. I CAN WORK WITH GARY IN FINANCE AND GET YOU THE SPECIFICS, BUT THAT'S THE INFORMATION I HAVE. I MEAN, THIS REALISTICALLY, I, I DON'T WANT TO SUGARCOAT ANYTHING. I THINK YOU GUYS NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT LITIGATION IS LITIGATION. WE CAN'T I'M NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND FILE SOMETHING AS A THREAT AND NOT SEE IT THROUGH. SO IF YOU GUYS WANT TO DO THIS, THEN WE HAVE TO MAKE THE DECISION AND THE COST ARE GOING TO BE THE COST. BUT THAT'S YOUR CHOICE. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO THIS, THEN JUST TELL ME THAT AND WE WON'T. BUT TO HAND, I MEAN, I FEEL COMFORTABLE SAYING RIGHT NOW, IF IT FEELS YOU, IT MAKES YOU GUYS FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THEY'RE NOT TO EXCEEDING NUMBER WOULD BE 125,000 RIGHT NOW THAT THAT MAKES ME FEEL COMFORTABLE IN GETTING THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND INITIATING WHAT WE NEED TO GET THROUGH, AND POTENTIALLY GETTING US TO A GOOD CONVERSATION RIGHT BEFORE SUMMER BREAK ON HOW MUCH MORE WE NEED, IF ANYTHING, OR IF WE'RE SUFFICIENT THROUGH THE SUMMER BREAK. I THINK THAT MAKES ME FEEL OKAY. BUT DID YOU, MR. DICKMAN, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? I JUST WANTED TO ADD, YOU KNOW, SINCE MONDAY, WE MATTHEW AND I SPOKE WITH JAMIE COLE, WHO IS THE OTHER ATTORNEY THAT IS A SPECIALIST IN THIS AREA THAT'S BEEN WORKING WITH US. AND THE REASON WHY WE WANTED TO MAKE AND ALSO THE DISCUSSIONS THAT WERE GOING ON WITH REGARD TO OTHER ACTIONS AND WHETHER OR NOT THE STATE OR THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTIONS, WE FELT THAT IT WAS NECESSARY TO HAVE THIS KIND OF LATITUDE TO PROTECT THE ASSET THAT YOU SAY YOU WANT TO PROTECT. BUT IN CHAPTER 164 PROCESS, IT DOES CONTEMPLATE FILING THE LAWSUIT THAT YOU WOULD NEED AND THEN PUTTING IT IN ABEYANCE AND GO DIRECTLY TO 164. THE BENEFIT TO THAT, AND I'LL BE FRANK WITH YOU, IS THAT WE CAN NOW SPEAK IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, BECAUSE IF WE DON'T FILE SOMETHING, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE IT. ALL THE DISCUSSIONS OUT IN THE SUNSHINE, EVEN THE DISCUSSIONS AT THE CONFLICT MEDIATION. SO THAT IS REVEALING SOMEWHAT OF A STRATEGY. BUT THE CHAPTER 164 PROCESS DOES CONTEMPLATE US DOING THAT. AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE DISCUSSED WAS IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT IN FLORIDA AS A CITY ATTORNEY TO TALK TO THEIR CLIENT. UNLESS YOU FILE A LAWSUIT OR SOMEONE FILES A LAWSUIT AGAINST YOU. MR. DICKMAN, CAN I ASK HIM A QUESTION ABOUT THAT? I THINK WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THIS? THE GOOD NEWS IS, IF IT'S IN ABEYANCE, THEN THE METER ON THE TAXI STOPS, TOO, RIGHT? WE, WE WE FOCUS ON THE 164 PROCESS.

BUT IF WE ALSO IT GIVES US THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO YOU. ALL RIGHT. AND SAY, DO YOU WANT TO FILE A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE. I HAVEN'T LOOKED, BUT I DON'T DOUBT MR. SCHULTZ'S COMMENT THAT TWO PEOPLE HAVE SIGNED UP. WE WOULD WANT TO PUT THE THE OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS ON NOTICE THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS HAPPENING AND YOU MAY WANT TO TAKE NOTICE OF IT. RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE DO NOT INTEND. AND, YOU KNOW, MATTHEW AND I ARE OUR WHOLE LAW FIRM. WE DON'T DO THESE THINGS LIGHTLY AND WE DON'T DO THINGS IN ORDER TO JUST LINE OUR POCKETS. WE DON'T DO THAT. THAT'S THAT'S JUST UNETHICAL. AND WE'RE AN ETHICAL FIRM. THANK YOU. YEAH. SO, MR. YOUNG, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING JUST TWO POINTS. SINCE MY NAME IS ALL OVER SIX AND SEVEN, I THINK I HAVE A ONE OF MY QUESTIONS WAS GOING TO BE, IF IT'S JUST A 164, DO YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO MEET IN EXECUTIVE SESSION? I THINK YOU'VE ALREADY ANSWERED THAT. AND THE SECOND PART OF IT IS, IS FROM THE STANDPOINT, IF YOU ESTIMATE IT'S 125, EVEN IF THERE IS A LITTLE BIT LEFT IN THAT LINE ITEM, I'D RECOMMEND ON MAY 6TH, WE DO WITH THE ENTIRE 125, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OTHER LITIGATION THAT COULD BE COMING DOWN THE PIKE. SO RATHER THAN IF THERE IS 70 LEFT FUNDING IT, THE DIFFERENCE WITH THE REMAINDER OF THE YEAR, I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU DO THAT. THE ONLY OTHER PART THAT I WOULD SAY IS AS YOUR CITY MANAGER, IT PUTS A LOT OF RESPONSIBILITY, INCLUDING 164 AND THE CHIEF ADMIN ADMINISTRATOR AND BEING PRESENT TO HELP NEGOTIATE THIS AND NOT

[04:35:02]

HAVING THE ABILITY TO KNOW WHAT IT IS YOUR POSITIONS ARE, IS VERY DETRIMENTAL IN HOW WILL I GET TO KNOW THAT? SO THAT'S JUST AN OBSERVATION FROM ME TO YOU. I ALWAYS TRY TO CARRY FORWARD BOTH WHAT I THINK IS RIGHT AND WHAT YOUR MESSAGES ARE AND YOUR DIRECTIVE TO ME.

BUT I, I CAN LOOK ACROSS THE DAIS AND LOOK YOU EACH IN THE EYE AND SAYING, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS ACROSS THE SEVEN OF YOU. AND SO THAT IS, THAT WILL BE THE DIFFICULTY IN THIS ONE. 64 AND IT YOU'RE ALL RIGHT IN THE SENSE THAT IT PERMEATES THIS COMMUNITY ON BOTH SIDES.

EVERY TIME I'M SITTING IN A PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL AND I'VE SAID THE SAME THING TO THEM, THE MOMENT IT COMES UP, IT'S DIVIDED. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THOSE THINGS. BUT, BUT, BUT I'M IN A TOUGH POSITION AS IT'S AS IT'S WRITTEN IN THE SENSE OF I DON'T HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS. I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE, BUT WHAT IS THE THE RESOLUTION THAT IS ACCEPTABLE? THAT'S WHERE IT DELINEATES BECAUSE THEY'VE NEVER HAD THAT CONVERSATION. SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THOSE THINGS. THANK YOU. MATTHEW, I HAVE A NOTATION HERE THAT THIS IS A 50 DAY PROCESS. IS THAT WAS THAT NOTE CORRECT IN MY NOTES? YES. OKAY. THE 164 IS A MAXIMUM 50 DAY PROCESS. OKAY. SO ONCE WE SEND THE LETTER, YOU HAVE 30 DAYS TO MEET AND THEN WITHIN 50 DAYS YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE JOINT MEETING. OKAY. SO I'D LIKE TO GO BACK, MR. SCHULTZ, BECAUSE YOU YOU ASKED SOME GOOD QUESTIONS. JUSTIFIABLE. WE HAVE HAD LAWSUITS IN THE PAST THAT HAVE BENEFITED THE FAR SOUTH END OF THE CITY, PROTECTING THE BAY. AND I'VE BEEN ON THIS DAIS WHERE WE GAVE AN AMOUNT, AND I THINK IT CAME BACK AT LEAST 3 OR 4 TIMES THAT WE HAD TO APPROPRIATE MORE FUNDS. WE ALSO HAD A LAWSUIT THAT BENEFITED THE NORTH END OF TOWN FOR SEA WALLS. AND I WILL TELL YOU, NEITHER ONE OF THOSE WERE INEXPENSIVE, AND THEY WENT OVER YEARS AND YEARS OF, OF LITIGATION. WE ALSO HAVE THE LAWSUIT AGAINST THIRD STREET THAT THEY ALSO HAD A LAWSUIT AGAINST EACH OTHER THAT WE FOUGHT FOR 20 YEARS. AND THEN THIS COUNCIL CAME IN AND SAID, WELL, WE DON'T CARE ABOUT IT. WE'RE GOING TO JUST IGNORE THAT COST THAT WAS SPENT ALL THOSE YEARS LITIGATING THAT. SO LAWSUITS ARE NOT EASILY DEFINED.

AND IT'S SET FOR EVERY LAWSUIT THAT WE I HAVE MENTIONED, WE WENT INTO IT BECAUSE IT WAS THE BEST INTEREST FOR THE ENTIRE CITY, NOT JUST ONE SECTION OF THE CITY. AND I THINK, AS YOU'RE SAYING, THAT'S OUR JOB. AND I APPRECIATE THAT FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY. JUST THE PART ABOUT GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT AND. TRAFFIC TRAFFIC. THANK YOU. IT WASN'T JUST ABOUT THE AIRPORT, BUT I ALSO CAMPAIGNED AND ALL OF THOSE IMPACT GROWTH, WHETHER IT'S BUILDINGS, WHETHER IT IS HOUSING, WHETHER IT IS THE AIRPORT, IT IS COMMERCIAL, ALL OF THAT WE HAVE TO CONSIDER, IN MY OPINION. THAT'S WHY I MADE THAT COMMENT TO YOU. AND OUR LOBBYIST IS IT'S A SHARED LOBBYIST, BUT WE AS A CITY PAY A FEE FOR OUR LOBBYISTS. WE DON'T SHARE THE COST WITH THE COUNTY. AND TO YOUR POINT, NOT MAKING ENEMIES AT THE STATE, I THINK THERE'S NOT ONE PERSON HERE THAT THAT DOESN'T AGREE WITH YOU. NOBODY WANTS TO FIGHT OR HAVE DISAGREEMENTS WITH THE STATE, BUT THEY CAN SPEAK UP AFTER I SPEAK IF THAT'S NOT TRUE, BECAUSE I THINK EVERY ONE OF US VALUE THE IMPORTANCE OF STATE AND LOCAL OFFICIALS, REGIONAL, LOCAL AND COUNTY WORKING TOGETHER. IF NOT, WE'RE CONSTANTLY AT A DIVISIVE POSITION. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA WANT. AND SO I, I, I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE WE I'VE

[04:40:04]

NOT SEEN THE CITY REALLY ADVERSE TO ANY STATE AGENCY EXCEPT FOR DEP. OR MAYBE IT WAS A BETTER TAKE THAT BACK. I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS DEP, BUT THERE WAS SOME STATE AGENCIES THAT WE HAD ISSUES WITH THAT WE WERE IN A LAWSUIT WITH. SO THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS.

BUT WE HAVE TO AGREE THAT WE WILL PROTECT OUR CITY LIKE WE DID THE SEAWALLS, THE BAY KEEWAYDIN ANY OTHER PIECE OF IMPORTANT LAND OF THIS CITY AS A HOME RULE. PERSONALLY, THIS IS I'M SPEAKING THAT WE HAVE TO EXPLORE THAT. AND AGAIN, I KNOW I SAID IT ON MONDAY, IT'S VERY CONCERNING THE WAY THIS HAS BEEN SET UP THAT WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH OUR NOAA. WE DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH OUR COUNTY REPRESENTATIVES. THEY DIDN'T SEEM TO HAVE AN ISSUE.

THEY DIDN'T COME TO US ABOUT THIS. IT CAME OUT OF THE PUBLIC AND SPECIAL INTEREST.

UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO RESOLVE, NOT THROUGH HAVING TO CHANGE OR HAVE THE STATE TAKE AWAY OUR HOME RULE POWERS. AND AS FAR AS HOMEROOM POWERS, THIS ISN'T THE ONLY ISSUE. SO IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT ALL OF THE ISSUES, JUST THIS YEAR, THERE'S OVER FIVE ISSUES THAT WE HAVE LOST OUR HOME RULE POWER ON. SO THERE'S IT'S A BIGGER ISSUE. I MEAN, THIS COMMUNITY SINCE OH EIGHT FOUGHT FOR BLOW GAS BLOWERS, NO POWER BLOWERS. WE FINALLY GET IT ACCOMPLISHED. AND THE COMMUNITY IS EXTREMELY EXCITED ABOUT IT. AND IN A BILL THIS TIME, THIS THIS SESSION FROM THE STATE TOOK AWAY THE AUTHORITY FROM EVERYONE IN THE STATE TO BE ABLE TO ENFORCE WHAT WE ALL THOUGHT WERE GOOD CODES AND OUR COMMUNITY ASKED FOR. SO I THINK THIS DIALOG IS NEEDED. WE DON'T WANT TO GO INTO THINGS BLINDLY, AND I JUST HOPE THAT WHAT YOU SAID EARLIER THAT YOU, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT SECTION, SECTION SEVEN. BUT IF, AS KRAMER SAID, YOU HAVE TO, YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT MIGHT COME ABOUT. AND FOR OUR LEGAL TEAM TO BE ABLE TO TALK TO US ABOUT THAT, NOTHING'S GOING TO GO WITH RECKLESS ABANDON, IN MY OPINION. TO CLARIFY, COUNCILMAN BARTON WAS TRYING TO SYNOPSIS SYNOPSIZE WHAT I WAS ATTEMPTING TO ARTICULATE. I'M IN FAVOR OF THE MEDIATION PROCESS. WE CAN RENEGOTIATE THE LEASE IN THAT PROCESS. TO MR. KROLL'S POINT, WE DEFINITELY COULD RENEGOTIATE THE LEASE. ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE CURRENT NAR HAS FILED TO RUN, I BELIEVE BAKER. MAYBE THE LAST NAME. I'M NOT POSITIVE, BUT THE. SO THERE'S PEOPLE THERE. SO WITH THAT. BUT I WANT TO I WANT TO TRY TO MEDIATE THIS TO EVERYBODY'S SATISFACTION AND TO OUR ADVANTAGE. I'M NOT DOING THIS FOR ANY OTHER REASON THAN TO ACT AS. AS I SAY, WE. THERE ARE SEVEN FIDUCIARIES HERE IN DIFFERENT CAPACITIES, AND SO I AM NOT TAKING ISSUE THAT THERE'S A LOT OF NOISE, THERE'S A LOT OF DISCOMFORT TO PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THIS PART OF TOWN.

I RECOGNIZE IT. BUT IN THAT MEDIATION PROCESS, WE CAN RENEGOTIATE THE LEASE. WE CAN ADDRESS THE CONCERNS, THE FINANCIAL CONCERNS OF THE DISPARITY OF THAT LEASE, BECAUSE IT STINKS. COUNCILMAN KRAMER, I BELIEVE THAT'S YOUR TERM. IT'S TERRIBLE. TOTALLY AGREE. I'M NOT DISAGREEING WITH ANYTHING. IF I DON'T ASK THESE QUESTIONS, I'M NOT DOING MY JOB AND I AM OPEN TO ANYTHING. BUT I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN LITIGATION 15 WAYS FROM SUNDAY OVER A VARIETY OF ISSUES IN MY LIFETIME. SETTLEMENT GENERALLY IS USUALLY THE BEST WAY TO GO ABOUT IT. JUST SO YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR LEGAL COSTS ARE GOING TO BE, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN CUT YOUR PAIN RIGHT THERE. AND SO I JUST BELIEVE THAT WE CAN ACHIEVE IN THE 147 A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT EVEN CONTEMPLATING NOW, BUT THEY WILL COME UP IN THE PROCESS, BUT RENEGOTIATION OF THE LEASE TO THE ISSUES YOU'RE RAISING IS PARAMOUNT AND ON MY LIST. SO I WOULDN'T GO INTO THIS THING BLINDLY. AND I, I AGREE, MAYOR HEITMANN, THAT THERE HAVE BEEN ISSUES ACROSS THE SPECTRUM FOR THE ENTIRE DIFFERENT ASPECTS AND PARTS OF THE CITY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME,

[04:45:03]

WE WERE FIGHTING A MULTI-FRONT WAR IN RESPECT THAT IF WE SUE, THERE CAN BE COUNTER SUITS AND COUNTER SUITS TAKE DIFFERENT PERMUTATIONS. THIS THING CAN GO IN A VARIETY OF WAYS THAT MAKE NO SENSE. BUT THE 147 AND AGAIN CLARIFYING ONE SIX. EXCUSE ME, ONE SIX. I'M SORRY. SECTION SEVEN. I JUST I JUST HAVE HEARTBURN. GOT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOT IT. IF IF WE COULD THOUGH, GET TO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION AND GET TO WHERE WE ARE. MORE STRATEGIES. I THINK OUR PURPOSE TODAY IS TO APPROVE THIS. I WOULD SUPPORT APPROVING THE RESOLUTION THAT WE RECEIVED LAST NIGHT. AND FROM FROM THAT POINT, I'LL LET I'LL LET YOU GO. I THINK MOVING FORWARD, WE CAN DEBATE A LOT OF THINGS, BUT RIGHT NOW WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO SIGN OR AGREE TO SIGN THIS RESOLUTION. I, I AGREE WITH YOU. AND I, I'VE ONLY CAVEAT I PUT IN THERE IS JUST TO APPLY THE $125,000 CAP LIMIT TO THIS, TO SECTION SEVEN.

THAT'S I THINK WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH APPROVING THIS WITH THAT CAP LIMIT SO THAT SO THAT WE'RE WE EVERYBODY UP HERE IS COMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT WE'VE GOT A, A CEILING, IF YOU WILL, ON THAT ON THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, KNOWING WE MAY NEVER SPEND IT AND KNOWING THAT WE MIGHT HOPEFULLY WE DON'T SPEND MORE. HOPEFULLY WE DON'T. EXACTLY. SO, MAYOR, REAL QUICK, JUST CLARIFICATION BECAUSE YOU YOU SAID RESOLUTION PROVIDED TO YOU LAST NIGHT, BUT I ACTUALLY WENT THROUGH A RESOLUTION THAT HAD SOME CHANGES. OKAY. YEAH, THERE WERE TWO ON THERE. THANK YOU. CAN YOU CLARIFY? I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF THE ONE WAS. IF I MAY, I THINK TODAY'S IS THE ONE THAT WE SHOULD APPROVE WITH THAT CAP LIMIT. WOULD, WOULD WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION. OKAY. I NEED TO LOOK AT THOSE AGAIN. IT'S IT'S ON THE SCREEN, MAYOR. IT WAS NOT PRINTED FOR YOU BECAUSE THERE WAS A DIFFERENT ONE A FEW MOMENTS AGO. IT'S THIS ONE. AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE ARE THE EDITS THAT I'VE HIDDEN. BUT THIS IS NOW WHAT SECTION SEVEN READS. WELL, I'M NOT COMFORTABLE. THIS IS HOW IT READS. OH WAIT, IT'S EASIER TO READ THIS OR THIS. YEAH, I KNOW WHICH ONE. I KNOW THIS ONE. CAN YOU GO BACK? MAYOR LIKES. SHE WANTS TO READ IT LIKE THIS REAL QUICK AND THEN I CAN GO BACK. THANK YOU. AND AGAIN, I ALWAYS IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ME SIGN A RESOLUTION, IF THERE'S ANY CHANGES TO IT, EVEN SCRIVENER'S ERROR, I SHOULD ALSO KNOW WHAT THOSE SCRIVENER ERRORS ARE. YOU AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT.

SO I MEAN, THAT'S A MINOR, MINOR, MINOR THING, BUT WAS THERE SOMETHING AT THE TOP? YEAH, THERE THAT WAS JUST VERBIAGE. A FEW JUST MOVING AROUND SOME RECITALS AND ADDING THE THE DAY IT WAS FILED. OH RIGHT. WHICH I THINK IS IMPORTANT, BUT, BUT I DO WANT TO CLARIFY JUST ONE POINT REAL QUICK. AND I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION, BUT. I AM NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING THAT YOU ALL DON'T WANT ME TO DO. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR, RIGHT? IF THERE'S CONFUSION THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN I'M JUST GOING TO HAVE FREE RANGE AND JUST START FILING LAWSUITS LIKE OPRAH HANDING OUT BOOKS. I MEAN, THAT'S NOT THE CASE AT ALL. AND RESPECTFULLY, TO EVERYONE UP HERE, YOU ALL KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I'M GOING TO DO. I'M NOT DOING ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT. AND IF I DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, THEN I'LL CALL YOU AND WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT. RIGHT? SO I, I JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR I'M NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING JUST BECAUSE LIKE, THIS IS NOT CARTE BLANCHE FOR US TO JUST DO WHATEVER WE FEEL IS RIGHT. THIS IS AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS YOUR DECISION.

AND I'M JUST CARRYING THROUGH. AND MATTHEW, I TOTALLY AGREE. AND I THANK EVERYBODY UP HERE SITTING UP HERE, REALIZE THAT AND KNOWS THAT I THINK IF FOR NO OTHER REASON, IT'S A SECURITY BLANKET FOR THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT WE'RE PUTTING A CAP ON IT RIGHT NOW. OKAY, SO I'M JUST GOING TO WHILE WE'RE HERE, I DON'T HAVE A KEYBOARD, BUT IN SECTION SEVEN, NOT TO EXCEED 125, OKAY. SORRY, MAYOR. I'M GETTING A COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ WOULD LIKE ME TO IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE EDITS AGAIN. YEAH. DO YOU WANT ME TO GO FOR THE TOP? OKAY. OKAY.

LINCOLNSHIRE. DID YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? I CAN I WILL NOT HURT MY FEELINGS. IF YOU'D LIKE TO JUMP. OKAY. I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT THIS RESOLUTION REGARDING THE SECTION 164 PROCESS, AS PRESENTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY TODAY, WITH THE ADDITION OF A INITIAL CAP ON LEGAL FEES IN

[04:50:09]

SECTION SEVEN OF $125,000, THAT'S. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BLANKENSHIP AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. 30 DAY PROCESS IS BAKED IN, IS THAT CORRECT? IT CAN BE SHORTER. IT'S THE THE SHORTER THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW IS OUTLINED IN CHAPTER 164. RIGHT. SO IT IS VERY PRESCRIPTIVE. AND WE WILL HAVE TO MEET ALL OF THOSE DEADLINES. SO YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A VOTE. YES. BUT IS. OKAY. SO IF WE BEAR WITH ME FOR A MINUTE, TITLE RESOLUTION, INITIATING CONFLICT RESOLUTION PROCEDURES PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 164. SO THAT PORTION OF THE TITLE WILL RESULT IN THE 30 DAY, 50 DAY TIMELINES THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE CHAPTER 164 LAYS OUT EXACTLY WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. I'M NOT SURE. I'M NOT SURE IF SHE HEARD IT. SHE HEARD I'VE ALREADY VOTED. I DON'T THINK SHE HEARD. OH YOU HEARD OKAY, OKAY. OKAY, GOOD. I'M SORRY.

YES, PLEASE. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ. NO. VICE MAYOR. YES. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. YES. IT PASSES 6 TO 1. THANK YOU. WITH THAT, MADAM MAYOR, I JUST WANT TO ADD ONE ITEM. YES, THE 125 WILL STILL COME BACK TO YOU IN THE FORM OF A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR MAY 6TH TO ACTUALLY APPROPRIATE THAT. THAT'S SETTING THE LIMITATIONS ON THE LITIGATION. YOU'LL STILL SEE THAT DOCUMENT ON CONSENT ON MAY 6TH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. MOVING RIGHT ALONG. THAT TAKES US TO ITEM MAYOR REAL QUICK BEFORE WE MOVE ON, JUST RELATED TO THE AIRPORT, I CAN WAIT FOR CORRESPONDENCE TOO. BUT BECAUSE THIS BILL BECAME A BILL AND I WASN'T HERE APRIL 1ST, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HAVE THE CONSENSUS TO TERMINATE OUR CONTRACT WITH GRAY ROBINSON. THEY WERE HIRED SPECIFICALLY TO HANDLE THIS. THERE'S LIKE A 30 DAY OR 60 DAY NOTICE REQUIREMENT. I WAS JUST MADE AWARE OF IT. I DON'T THINK WE NEED THEM ANYMORE. OBVIOUSLY, THE BILL IS A BILL, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I GET A CONSENSUS TO DO THAT. YES, YES, THAT WAS OUR LOBBYIST. YES.

THAT WAS YEAH. NOT TO GET CONFUSED WITH OUR CITY LOBBYIST. THAT WAS THE AIRPORT SPECIFIC ONE. CAN WE MAKE NOTE ABOUT THEIR HOW EFFECTIVE THEY WERE AND THAT MOVE FOR MOVING FORWARD? JUST MAYBE A MENTAL NOTE, IF NOTHING ELSE. SURE. THANKS. BUT THAT'S A YES.

SCHULTZ. YES. YES. YES. YES. THERE ARE NO YES. OKAY. A NO TO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO PAY FOR THE LOBBYIST? OH. STRIKE THAT FROM THE RECORD. YES YES YES YES. THANK YOU FOR THAT

[14.B) A Resolution Approving an Independent Contractor’s Services Agreement Between the City of Naples and Hannula Landscaping and Irrigation, Inc., a Florida Corporation, for the Banyan Boulevard Median Landscape Restoration Project (ITB 26-015) in the amount of $370,719.20; Approving a City-Controlled Contingency in the Amount of $5,000; Approving a Supplemental Appropriation from the Unappropriated Fund Balance of the 340 Public Service Tax Fund in the Amount of $375,719.20; Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Independent Contractor’s Services Agreement; and Providing an Effective Date. ]

CLARIFICATION. GOOD POINT. OKAY. HELLO. GOOD AFTERNOON. IT'S 222 AND WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM 14 B. YES. THANK YOU. MAYOR RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF NAPLES AND LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION, INC. A FLORIDA CORPORATION FOR THE BANYAN BOULEVARD MEDIAN LANDSCAPE RESTORATION PROJECT. IT'S B 26 015 IN THE AMOUNT OF $370,719.20, APPROVING A CITY CONTROLLED CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF 5000 APPROVING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE OF 340 PUBLIC SERVICE TAX FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $375,719.20. AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR SERVICES AGREEMENT AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU. I DO WANT TO. YES. THANK YOU. MAYOR CHAD MAY TOUCH ON THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT I WHEN I REFERENCED THE I THINK IT WAS THE LAST MEETING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT WHETHER TO USE MULCH OR NOT TO MULCH. THIS WAS THE MEDIAN THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING. AND SO BUT I WOULD ALSO PREFACE THIS, THAT THIS THIS HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS NOW FOR QUITE SOME TIME. WE HAD BID IT ONCE, GOT ONE BIDDER AND REBID IT A SECOND TIME AND ACTUALLY GOT A REDUCED AMOUNT. DID WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO, IT DELAYED IT, MUCH TO THE CHAGRIN

[04:55:01]

OF RESIDENTS. YOU KNOW, ANOTHER 90 DAYS. BUT WE DID HAVE BID THIS ITEM TWICE NOW. AND WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CHAD MERRITT TO TO GO THROUGH THE DETAILS. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YES. GOOD AFTERNOON. CHAD MERRITT, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR. I WAS GOING TO GET MATTHEW TO READ THAT ONE MORE TIME. THAT GAVE ME A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO GET THIS BACK UP.

ALL RIGHT. SO I KIND OF PREPARED THIS AS A PRESENTATION. TRY TO TIE IT ALL TOGETHER. I FELT THAT WAS THE THE EASIEST WAY TO GO ABOUT. SO THE CURRENT CONDITION, I'M A PICTURE GUY.

YOU ALWAYS SEE PICTURES FROM ME. I TRY TO SHOW YOU WHY WE DO THINGS. AND WHEN WE LOOK AT THINGS AND WHEN WE LOOK AT THE BANYAN BOULEVARD MEDIAN, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT NEED TO BE IMPROVED. AND WE'VE SAID THIS BEFORE AND YOU'VE HEARD US SAY IT AND WE'LL SAY IT AGAIN. THESE MEDIANS ARE LIKE A FLOWER POT, AND THEY EVENTUALLY OUTGROW THE SPACE.

THIS IS A SMALL SPACE FOR A VERY MATURE PLANTS TO TO GROW. YOU GOT SHRUBS, YOU GOT TREES.

AND WHAT OCCURS IS EVENTUALLY THAT PLANT MATERIAL, THE ROOTS BOUND, THEY START TO PUSH THE GROUND UP. SO WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT STORMWATER, THE MEDIANS ARE NO LONGER HELPING YOU BECAUSE THEY'VE CREATED A ALMOST A, A MOUND THAT PUSHES THE STORMWATER OFF OF IT AND CREATES MORE FLOODING WITHIN THE STREETS. SO WHEN YOU GO IN HERE AND WE DO A PROJECT LIKE THIS, WE GO IN AND WE REMOVE THE PLANT MATERIAL TO REPLACE IT WITH NEW PLANT MATERIAL, BUT WE ALSO GO IN AND REMOVE SOIL AND WE BREAK UP THE SOIL, AND WE HAVE TO GO IN AND MAKE SOME IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS BECAUSE AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THE ROOT SYSTEMS GET WITHIN THE IRRIGATION LINES AND WE'RE CONSTANTLY CHASING THAT AS IT GETS TO THIS POINT. SO THAT'S WHY WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS PROCESS. AND IT'S BEEN A THING THAT HAS THE CITY HAS ALWAYS BEEN KNOWN FOR, IS TO HAVE MEDIANS THAT LOOK GREAT AND OUTSTANDING. WITH THAT COMES PROJECTS LIKE THIS. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS IN OUR EYES, THIS IS STARTING TO THE HEALTH OF THIS MEDIAN IS STARTING TO DECAY. AND THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE IN THE TERMS OF WHAT WE WANT TO MAINTAIN. SO YOU LOOK HERE, YOU SEE THE THINNING OF THE BUSHES HERE. A LOT OF THIS TO KEEP IN MIND. WE'VE HAD MULTIPLE STORMS AND IT'S REALLY TAKE A TAKEN A BEATING WITH SOME OF THE SHRUBS AND SO ON. YOU SEE HERE THESE SHRUBS ARE DEAD. SO WE'LL HAVE TO REMOVE THOSE AGAIN. AND WE'RE WE TRY TO GIVE THEM AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT OF TIME UNDERSTANDING THE GROWING SEASONS COMING. HERE'S SOME OF THE ROUTE. YOU SEE THE ROUTE IN THIS PICTURE. IT'S GOING INTO THE CURB AREA. SO EVENTUALLY THESE ROUTES ARE EITHER GOING TO START FIGHTING TO PUSH INTO THE ROADS AND, AND DAMAGE THE ROAD, OR WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME IN AND TRY TO DO SOMETHING AS WE'RE DOING NOW. THIS IS THE MEDIAN. THIS IS FOR THOSE THAT ARE LISTENING. THIS IS NOT A DRIVEWAY, BUT PEOPLE DRIVE THROUGH THIS CONSTANTLY AND IT IS. THAT'S WHY YOU SEE IT IN THE CONDITION THAT IT'S IN RIGHT NOW WITH MULCH, BECAUSE PLANT MATERIAL HAS BEEN EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO BE ABLE TO GROW WITH THAT HAPPENING. SO WE ARE WORKING WITH THE STREET DEPARTMENT TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION SO THAT WHEN WE DO PUT THE THE PLANS THAT YOU SAW ON THERE, WHEN WE PUT THAT IN PLACE, IT'LL HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE PROTECTION. AND HOPEFULLY IT CAN DISCOURAGE PEOPLE FROM RIDING THROUGH THE MEDIANS. BUT THIS KIND OF SHOWS YOU HERE WHAT THE CONDITION IS AND, AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE SOME IMPROVEMENTS ON. I PROVIDED THIS ALSO BECAUSE AS WE TALK, TALK ABOUT MULCH AND WE TALK ABOUT THINGS LIKE THAT, I WANT YOU TO SEE THE AREAS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WHERE WE HAVE TO PUT THE MULCH IN THE GROUND. COVER AREAS LIKE THIS ARE WHERE THAT WOULD GO. AREAS LIKE THIS ON THE SIDE, UP TO THE CURB. AND SORRY. SO AGAIN, ONE OF THE THINGS FOR US IS THE MULCH REALLY KIND OF BECOMES A PROBLEM WHEN WE HAVE THE STORM EVENTS AND THE WATER STARTS TO COME IN. THAT'S WHEN THAT HAPPENS. BUT YOU'VE GOT MULCH THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE CITY. AND THAT'S NOT JUST ON OUR PROPERTY, THAT'S IN PRIVATE PROPERTY. SO BUT AT THAT POINT, WHEN A STORM COMES, NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE MULCH, BUT YOU GOT DEBRIS, YOU'VE GOT SAND, YOU'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF EVERYTHING MIXED IN. SO WE TYPICALLY DON'T LOSE A TON OF IT HERE UNTIL YOU GET INTO RAINY SEASON. YOU HAVE FLOODING EVENTS WITHIN THE STREETS AND THAT DOES CREATE THAT. SO GOING BACK, THIS IS THE PROJECT AGAIN. I TALKED ABOUT THE FLOWER POT SITUATION, BUT THIS GIVES YOU A SCOPE OF WHERE THE PROJECT IS. THIS IS ON BANYAN BOULEVARD FROM GULF SHORE BOULEVARD UP TO 41. THIS WOULD BE THE COMPLETE DEMO OF EXISTING LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION. THE REPLACEMENT OF VEGETATION WITH NEW TREES, PALMS, SHRUBS, GROUND COVER, ETC. REMOVING THE SOIL, SOIL

[05:00:05]

AND ADDING NEW SOIL APPROXIMATELY 6 TO 12IN. WE'RE PROBABLY CLOSER TO SIX INCHES ON THIS ONE. AND THEN REPLACING IRRIGATION. THE OVERALL PROJECT, THE ENGINEER, THE OPC, CAME IN AT ABOUT 353,941ST BID AS CITY MANAGER STATED, WE WERE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE NUMBERS THAT CAME BACK AND THAT IS, I'LL USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW WE DON'T ALWAYS JUST ACCEPT THE BID JUST BECAUSE IT COMES THROUGH. WE'RE VERY, VERY PARTICULAR ON HOW WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. SO WE REJECTED THOSE BIDS. WE REBID THIS. WE MADE SURE WE LOOKED AT THE SCOPE TO MAKE SURE THE SCOPE MADE SENSE. WE PUT IT OUT THIS TIME. WE GOT FOUR PROPOSALS.

LAST TIME WE GOT ONE PROPOSAL. SO THESE FOUR CAME BACK HANNULA WAS THE BEST AND LOWEST, MOST RESPONSIVE BID, WHICH PUT US AT 370,000 378,000, IS WHAT REMAINS IN 25 F 32, WHICH IS THE CFP, WHICH I SAY THIS BUT UNDERSTAND MOVING OUT OF A DIFFERENT BUDGET. SO THAT'S WHY IT REQUIRED US TO DO THE SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION, WHICH WAS WHY MATTHEW'S TITLE WAS SO LONG. THE. SO WE'RE ALSO REQUESTING 5000 CITY, $5,000 CITY CONTROL CONTINGENCY FOR UNFORESEEN ISSUES. WHEN THEY START GETTING IN AND DIGGING THIS STUFF OUT, WE NEED TO HAVE SOMETHING TO KIND OF BE A LITTLE BIT PREPARED IN CASE THEY RUN INTO SOMETHING THAT GOES OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT IN WHICH THEY BID. SO WE DON'T LIKE USING THAT MONEY. IT'S KIND OF THAT MONEY THAT WE'RE VERY STRICT ON HOW WE WANT TO USE IT, BUT WE ALSO USE IT WHEN WE NEED TO SO THAT WE DON'T POSTPONE THE PROJECT TO HAVE TO COME BACK AND, AND GET ADDITIONAL FUNDS. TIMELINE. THE GOAL WOULD BE TO GET THIS PROJECT DONE WITHIN THE NEXT GROWING SEASON, WHICH IS UPON US, AS IF WE CAN GET SOME RAIN. THE GROUND COVER DISCUSSION.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION IS DETERMINE WHAT THE GROUND COVER OPTIONS ARE. SO THAT MOVES US INTO THE GROUND COVER OPTIONS. SO WHAT WE DID IS WE GOT ESTIMATES BASED ON THAT AND AS SOME OPTIONS THAT WE HAVE. SO ONE OF THE OPTIONS IS PINE STRAW. WE ESTIMATED ABOUT 210YD■!T. THAT WOULD ESTIMATED COST FOR THAT WAS GOING TO RUN ABOUT 21,000. WE WOULD HAVE TO REPLACE THAT PROBABLY TWICE A YEAR, DEPENDING ON WHAT KIND OF BEATING IT TOOK. SO UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS A REOCCURRING EXPENSE THAT WE WOULD HAVE WITH PINE STRAW, THEN YOU HAVE THE PINE BARK MULCH. I'LL PUT THAT IN THERE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE USE NOW.

BUT I WANTED YOU TO SEE KIND OF THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. SO ESTIMATED COST FOR THIS PROJECT. THIS IS BASED ON THIS PROJECT BY THE WAY, $24,150. AGAIN, WE REPLACED THIS ABOUT TWICE A YEAR. AND THEN YOU HAVE RIVER ROCK. RIVER ROCK WOULD RUN ABOUT 80,500. YOU KIND OF HAVE TO TOP IT OFF EVERY 2 TO 5 YEARS. AS LONG AS YOU DON'T HAVE SOMETHING CRAZY, GO IN THERE AND START PUSHING IT IN THE WAY. ANYTIME THAT YOU HAVE A CAR THAT RUNS INTO THE MEDIAN, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO GET SOME STUFF DISPLACED AND WE'D HAVE TO COME IN AND FILL THAT IN. AND THEN YOU HAVE WHAT'S CALLED MEXICAN BEACH PEBBLE. I REFER TO IT AS BROOKSTONE, BUT IT'S THE CIRCULAR ROCKS, WHICH I'LL SHOW YOU PICTURES IN A SECOND, BUT ABOUT 210,000 IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT WITH THAT. AND AGAIN, THAT WOULD BE A SCENARIO WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE TO TOP IT OFF. AND EVERY 2 TO 5 YEARS REPLACEMENT IS NOT NECESSARILY NEEDED. YOU DO TYPICALLY PUT WEED SCREEN UP UNDERNEATH THESE SO THAT IT KIND OF HOLDS IT IN PLACE.

OTHERWISE THE ROCK CAN START TO SINK INTO THE GROUND. SO PINE STRAW PICTURE THAT AGAIN, JUST SHOWING YOU PICTURES OF WHAT THAT THAT KIND OF LOOKS LIKE. I TRIED TO PULL MEDIAN PICTURES, BUT I COULDN'T ALWAYS FIND MEDIAN PICTURES ON THAT, SO I APOLOGIZE. SO THIS IS WHAT THE PINE STRAW WOULD LOOK LIKE. THIS IS WHAT THE CURRENT MULCH LOOKS LIKE. AND IT'S KIND OF FUNNY BECAUSE YOU GOT THE MULCH THERE BUTTED UP TO THE ROCK THAT'S LARGE RIVER ROCK THERE.

AND THEN HERE'S RIVER ROCK AND WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE WITHIN THE FLOWER BED. AND THEN HERE'S THE BEACH PEBBLE. AND I COULDN'T REALLY FIND THAT IN, IN A MEDIAN OR PICTURE WITHIN THE MEDIAN, BUT THIS SHOWS YOU WHAT THE, THE BEACH PEBBLE LOOKS LIKE. SO I PUT THIS IN BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO WHEN WE'VE DONE SOME OF THESE, THIS IS ACTUALLY IN PORT ROYAL. WE CAME IN AND WE HAD TO REDO SOME OF THE MEDIANS AND WE DID GRASS, AND WE HAD JUST A LITTLE AREA RIGHT IN THE CENTER WITH SOME MULCH IN THERE. IT WAS VERY MINIMAL, BUT IT BROKE IT UP A LITTLE BIT. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING ELSE AS AN OPTION THAT WE COULD HAVE TO. NOW KEEP IN MIND, WHEN WE ADD GRASS WE INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF MOWING. SO THERE IS

[05:05:02]

AN EXPENSE THAT WILL BE TIED TO THAT. BUT I DID WANT TO SHOW THIS AS A SOLUTION OF WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO IS GOING IN TO DO THIS. NOW, I KNOW IN THE PAST EVERYBODY LIKES TO HAVE THE THE LUSH VEGETATION AND THAT CAN CREATE ISSUES, AS WE'VE ALL PROBABLY HEARD WHEN IT COMES TO LINE OF SIGHT AND THINGS LIKE THAT. THIS DOESN'T NECESSARILY THIS IS VERY CLEAN.

AND I ONLY SPEAK ON WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM PORT ROYAL. THEY'RE EXTREMELY HAPPY WITH THIS. I THINK IT LOOKS CLEAN. I THINK IT'S VERY EFFECTIVE OF OF A CLEAN LOOK. AND YOU'VE GOT THE OUR RESIDENTS ARE EXTREMELY GOOD WITH MAINTAINING THEIR OWN LANDSCAPING. SO THEY ADD TO IT WHEN YOU'RE RIDING THROUGH AND YOU LOOK AT THAT, THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S LANDSCAPE AND IT REALLY ADDS TO COLOR. WHEN YOU HAVE STUFF LIKE THIS, IT MAKES THINGS LOOK CLEANER. SO WHAT'S NEXT FOR US IS DETERMINE THE DIRECTION, COMPLETE THE BANYAN BOULEVARD GROUND COVERING AS A SEPARATE PROJECT. SO WE DID SEPARATE THIS OUT PURPOSELY TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, BECAUSE WHAT I DIDN'T WANT TO DO IS WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT MULCH, MULCH, MULCH. DO WE KEEP DOING THAT? I DIDN'T WANT TO DO ANOTHER PROJECT INCLUDE MULCH. AND THEN WE'RE SITTING HERE GOING, WE HAVEN'T EVEN HAD THAT DISCUSSION. SO WE PULLED THAT OUT OF THE PROJECT KNOWING THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT THIS BACK IN. SO ONCE WE DETERMINE WHAT WHAT WE WANT TO WHAT DIRECTION WE WANT TO GO IN, WE'LL GO OUT AND WE'LL, WE'LL DO THE PROCUREMENT PROCESS TO GET THIS ITEM, AND WE'LL COMPLETE THAT AND TRY TO COMPLETE IT WITHIN THE THE SAME TIME FRAME SO THAT WHEN THE PROJECT'S COMPLETE, WE HAVE GROUND COVER AND IT'S FULL. SO THAT BRINGS US TO THIS DISCUSSION. SO I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR QUESTIONS. I LIKE THAT LOOK ON RUM ROW TWO. THAT PICTURE YOU HAVE, IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE ACTUAL BED ITSELF THAT'S MULCHED. RIGHT. IS THAT IT? IS.

DOESN'T THE SAINT CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG? IT SEEMS LIKE THE SAINT AUGUSTINE PROVIDES A BUFFER AND KEEPS IT FROM MIGRATING AS MUCH. WHEN YOU'VE GOT. THAT OBVIOUSLY DEPENDS HOW HIGH THE FLOOD IS. YEAH IT DOES, BUT ANYTIME YOU GET. I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO MATTER.

EVEN IF YOU HAVE THE STORM SURGE FLOOD, YOU CAN PROBABLY HAVE ROCKS IN THE IN THE ROAD.

THAT'S RIGHT. OKAY. AND THERE WAS NO SAINT AUGUSTINE GRASS OPTION FOR THE BANYAN PROJECT.

WE CAN ALWAYS MAKE OPTIONS. IF YOU LOOKED AT THE THE WAY THAT IT'S SET UP, YOU CAN GO IN AND YOU CAN FIND WAYS TO PUT THE GRASS IN THE AREAS. THE. THE THING THAT YOU REALLY WANT TO AVOID IS PUTTING THE, THE MULCH ON THE CURB. YEAH. THAT'S WHAT KIND OF PUTS IT A LITTLE BIT VULNERABLE. SO WHEN YOU GO THROUGH THESE DESIGNS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DO THAT AND, AND YOU'VE SEEN A MIX, I SHOWED YOU A SECOND AGO WHERE SOMEBODY WANTED THE DESIGNS. THAT'S ANOTHER CITY DID WAS WHICH THEY HAD THE ROCK ON THE MIDDLE. BUT DO YOU DO THE ROCK ON THE OUTSIDE? IF YOU SELECTED ROCK AND THEN PUT THE MULCH IN THE MIDDLE, SOMETHING HOLDING THE MULCH IN IS WHAT'S IMPORTANT. HAVING THE MULCH ON THE EDGE OF THE THE CURB IS, IS WHAT IS GOING TO CREATE THAT LITTLE BIT OF DISPLACEMENT AMOUNT, ESPECIALLY IF YOU GET HIGH WINDS OR SOMETHING THAT IT CAN EVEN BLOW THE MULCH AROUND. SO YEAH, I MEAN, ANYTHING'S POSSIBLE. AND YOU KNOW, WE, WE SHOWED THAT WITHIN THIS PROJECT. AND, AND I THINK IT, I MEAN, IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN IT IN PERSON, I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT. YEP. THANKS. OF COURSE THAT'S GOING TO BRING MR. HODGSON TO HAVE TO GO AND EVALUATE EACH ONE BECAUSE I MEAN, YOU KNOW, NOT ALL MEDIANS ARE THE SAME. I MEAN, SOME MAY IF WE WERE TO CHOOSE THE PEBBLE OR THE. RIVER ROCK. YES. YOU CERTAINLY WOULDN'T WANT TO TAKE THAT EXPENSE AND FILL THE HOLE. AND I KNOW YOU KNOW THIS. I'M JUST SAYING IT. FILL THE WHOLE BED. IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO A BORDER.

YES. AND THEN WHAT WOULD BE THOSE OPTIONS, WHETHER IT WAS GRASS OR I MEAN, I THINK EACH ONE OF THEM. YEAH. I'LL GIVE JIM HODGSON, PARKS AND PARKWAYS SUPERINTENDENT REGARDING THE BANYAN BOULEVARD. I MEAN WE ALREADY HAVE A CONTRACT WRITTEN UP FOR THE WAY IT'S DESIGNED.

NOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DO TO TRY TO ADD SOD TO THAT NOW, BUT YOU KNOW, IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE REALLY NEED TO CONSIDER AS WE MOVE ON TO NEW PROJECTS, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE OTHER MEDIANS PLANNED IN THE FUTURE AS WELL. THESE MEDIANS ARE AT LEAST 1520 YEARS OLD SINCE THEY'VE BEEN REPLENISHED. WE'RE TAKING ALL THAT OUT. WE'RE GETTING THAT

[05:10:02]

LEVEL BACK DOWN THE ROAD SPECIFICALLY TO HOLD EVERYTHING IN, YOU KNOW, AND OVER THE YEARS, YOU KNOW, YOU GET MULCH BUILT UP, IT BREAKS DOWN, BUILDS UP AND STUFF. SO YEAH, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S ALL APPLICABLE TO WHEREVER WE'RE GOING TO DO THE PROJECT. AND I'LL KIND OF SAY YOU MADE A GREAT POINT BECAUSE EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID, THIS ISN'T SOMETHING IN WHATEVER DECISION WE MAKE MOVING FORWARD, THIS ISN'T GOING TO BE AN OVERNIGHT THING.

IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PICK IT OFF ONE BY ONE. AND IT'S IT'S GOING TO BE A BIGGER CONVERSATION THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE MORE THAN LIKELY IN LIKE A BUDGET TIME TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT TO FUND IT PROPERLY. BECAUSE YOU SAW THE NUMBERS ON JUST THAT, ON WHAT THE OPTIONS WOULD, WOULD TAKE AND BRINGING SOMEBODY IN AND SOME OF THEM MAYBE MIX IT. THERE ARE TIMES LIKE WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT WITH BANYAN. IT MAY NOT MAKE SENSE TO DO THE GRASS IN BANYAN'S. IT MAY MAKE SENSE TO GO AND DO THE ROCK THERE. SO WE MOVE FORTH ON THE ROCK. BUT THEN THE NEXT ONE THAT WE DESIGNED, WE SAY, HEY, WE'D LIKE TO REALLY INCORPORATE THE SAINT AUGUSTINE AND THAT DESIGN. AND WE HAVE THEM DESIGN IT BECAUSE THEN YOU GET YOUR IRRIGATION'S DESIGNED FOR PLANT MATERIAL. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS AND WE LOOK AT BANYAN AND LOOKING AT IT, BEING ABLE TO HAVE PLANT MATERIAL WHERE I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT OR I'D SAY, I, WE'D HAVE TO LOOK AT WHERE THE IRRIGATION IS AND WHETHER OR NOT PUT PUTTING THAT THERE IS GOING TO MAKE SENSE. IS IT GOING TO GET WATER? SO THAT WOULD BE THE QUESTION TOO. SO I DO THINK IT'S A BIGGER CONVERSATION, BUT IT IS BETTER FOR US TO DETERMINE WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO MOVING FORWARD, BECAUSE WE DO HAVE WE CONTINUOUSLY DO PROJECTS OVER AND OVER, AND I DON'T WANT US TO HAVE TO REPLICATE WORK. YEAH.

AND GO BACK TO GOING BACK TO THE SOD. I MEAN, SOME OF YOU CAN REMEMBER GULF SHORE BOULEVARD, ESPECIALLY DOWN TOWARDS ADMIRALTY AND DOWN BY HARBOR. I MEAN, A LOT OF THOSE MEETINGS BEFORE THEY WERE DONE HAD A LOT OF SOD IN THEM. AND YOU KNOW, THERE IT'S IT'S EASIER FOR MAINTENANCE. HONESTLY. IT IS. BUT AGAIN, I THINK THE DIRECTION BACK THEN WAS TO GET RID OF THE SOD AND GO WITH COLORFUL PLANTS AND FLOWERS AND, YOU KNOW, BROMELIADS. AND SO, YOU KNOW, OVER TIME, THAT STUFF BUILDS UP AND BUILDS UP ROOT SYSTEMS IN THE, IN THE MEDIANS. SO. WELL, THE FIRST THING IS YOU REDOING IT AND CLEANING THEM OUT AFTER ALL THESE YEARS IS THE BIGGEST KEY. IT'S THE HUGE KEY. AND, AND WE TRIED TO SHARE THAT WHEN WE DID CENTRAL AS WELL. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, CENTRAL HAS DONE WELL IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO TO HOW IT'S MULCHED. NOW. WE'VE CHANGED OUR MULCHING PRACTICES OVER THE YEARS TOO. WE'RE ALSO GOING LESS MULCH. WE'RE ALSO GOING LESS TIMES IN THE YEAR DOING IT. SOME OF THEM I SKIP OVER IF IT'S IF IT'S FINE.

THERE WAS A PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE I GOT HERE WHERE EVERYTHING WAS DONE. EVERY YEAR, PARKS, MEDIANS, ANY ANY RIGHT OF WAYS THAT WERE WERE MAINTAINED. AND YOU KNOW, WE'VE CHANGED, WE'VE REDUCED BUDGETS THAT WAY TOO. SO GOOD. I MEAN, YOU, I THINK YOU NEED TO I HAVE BLANKENSHIP YEAH. FIRST OF ALL, SPECIFICALLY ON THE PROJECT, I KNOW YOU TALKED WITH THE COQUINA SANDS NEIGHBORS QUITE A BIT. THAT'S REALLY APPRECIATED TO GET THEIR INPUT. IT SOUNDS LIKE IT WAS A MAYBE A FEW MONTHS AGO BEFORE THIS FINAL PROPOSAL. SO I JUST RECOMMEND YOU CIRCLE BACK WITH THEM BEFORE CONSTRUCTION STARTS TO REMIND THEM. MAKE SURE THEY KNOW, MAKE SURE THEY'VE COMMUNICATED TO THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD. I DON'T KNOW WHO ALL REMEMBERS. A FEW YEARS AGO, WHEN THE PROJECT WAS DONE ON GULF SHORE BOULEVARD NORTH, IT WAS DRAMATIC CHANGES AND EVERYBODY WAS REALLY UPSET. THANKFULLY. NIGHTMARES.

COUNCILMAN BLANKENSHIP, CAN WE JUST MOVE ON? I JUST WANT TO AVOID THAT. NOBODY WANTS. I CAN ASSURE YOU, NOBODY WANTS TO AVOID THAT MORE THAN I DO. YEAH, YOU ARE CORRECT. WE HAVE WORKED VERY EXTENSIVELY WITH THEM. AND WHEN WE GET READY TO GO, WE WILL AGAIN SEND OUT NOTIFICATIONS THROUGH THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION TO THOSE IMMEDIATELY AFFECTED. AND ACTUALLY, WE'LL EVEN WORK WITH MONIQUE THROUGH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO MAKE SURE IT GOES OUT CITYWIDE AS WELL, BECAUSE THAT'S A MAIN ROAD THAT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL BE ON. SO I CAN ASSURE YOU IT HELPS MY PHONE CALL LIMITS AS WELL IF WE NOTIFY A LOT OF PEOPLE. SO WE WE WILL MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO DO THAT. AND WITH YOUR PLAN CALLING FOR THE REMOVAL OF 86 TREES AND THE MEDIANS, YOU YOU WANT TO TRY TO GET IN FRONT OF THAT AND LET PEOPLE KNOW WHY YOU'RE DOING IT. AND THE NEW TREES THAT WILL BE PLANTED. OTHERWISE. YEAH,

[05:15:01]

PEOPLE WILL BE PRETTY UPSET. THEY LOVE THE TREES. YES. THE TREES. ABSOLUTELY. WE ARE PUTTING 95 BACK IN THOUGH, SO IT'S A NET GAIN. MAKE SURE THEY KNOW THAT. BUT NO. AND YOU KNOW WHAT YOU JUST SAID SIR IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE POINT OUT THE EXACT NUMBER IN THERE BECAUSE WE DON'T WE WANT WE WANT TO BE TRANSPARENT ABOUT IT. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.

THIS IS HOW MANY HAVE TO COME OUT, BUT THIS IS HOW MANY WILL GO IN. AND YES, THAT WILL BE SHARED IN EXPLICIT NUMBERS, NOT JUST, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO REMOVE SOME STUFF. YES, GREAT, GREAT. ON THE MULCHING MEDIANS, IT STRIKES ME THAT A ONE SIZE FITS ALL ISN'T WHAT WE REALLY WANT. WE WANT A COMBINATION OF DIFFERENT FEATURES AND METHODS DEPENDING ON THE LOCATION. SOME PLACES GRASS MAKES SENSE. SOME PLACES MULCH MAKES SENSE. IT DOES SEEM TO ME TO MAKE SENSE ALONG CURBING TO MAKE SURE IT'S NOT PINE BARK OR PINE STRAW, SO THAT THERE'S SOMETHING TO TRY TO CATCH IT FROM GOING INTO THE STREET AND INTO THE STORMWATER DRAINS THAT WHETHER IT'S GRASS OR THE RIVER ROCK OR THE PEBBLES, SOMETHING TO CATCH IT. I KNOW IF WE HAVE AN N TYPE STORM SURGE, YOU CAN'T STOP IT. OF COURSE, EVEN JUST THE NORMAL. EVEN WITH A NORMAL RAINFALL, SOME OF OUR HEAVY RAINFALL, LIKE GULF SHORE BOULEVARD, WE'VE EXPERIENCED FLOODING IN THE STREETS IMMEDIATELY. AND I'M TALKING DOWN NORTH OF HARBOR IS A REAL PROBLEM SPOT FOR US WITH THE MEDIAN, BECAUSE CARS WILL DRIVE THROUGH THERE AND A WAVE OF WATER WILL GO UP INTO THE MEDIA AND JUST PUSH EVERYTHING THAT'S IN THE MEDIA. AND THEN WE STARTED PUTTING ROCK ON THE EDGE TO TRY TO HOLD THE SOIL IN THERE. AND GUESS WHAT? THAT ROCK ALL MOVED UP TO THE MIDDLE OF THE MEDIAN AS WELL. SO AND WE DIDN'T USE THE BIG, BIG ROCK, BUT WE USED MORE LIKE A, A KIND OF A NOT PEA STONE, BUT IT WAS HEAVIER THAN THAT. BUT, BUT YEAH, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE, WE HAVE FLOODING PROBLEMS THAT CREATE SOME OF THIS STUFF TOO AS A PROBLEM FOR US. AND IT HAPPENS. WE, WE HAVE IDENTIFIED THOSE AREAS AND WE PAY ATTENTION TO THAT NOW. SO WHAT WE'RE PUTTING OUT THERE FOR GREAT. BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU MAY WANT THE BIGGER ROCK OR THE GRASS OR SOME OTHER SOLUTION. YEAH. SO YOU HAVE THE FLEXIBILITY. YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO ONE THING IN EVERY LOCATION. YEAH. AND WE'VE UTILIZED A LITTLE MORE PINE STRAW RECENTLY, SEAGATE, WE DID A LOT OF PINE STRAW DOWN THERE. IT HELD UP REALLY WELL. SO WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO EXPLORE THOSE OTHER OPTIONS TOO. BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT, IT ISN'T ALL MULCH EVERYWHERE. GREAT. THANK YOU ALL. BARTON. I'M SORRY. I HAVE SCHULTZ THEN. BARTON. I KNEW I WAS OUT OF ORDER. I JUST FINE A PET PEEVE I HAVE WHEN YOU PUT IN THE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS IN THOSE. IT'S INEVITABLE THAT WHENEVER I GET MY CAR WASHED, I'M GOING BY.

AND THESE THINGS ARE SPRAYING ALL INTO THE STREET. IS THERE A WAY TO USE MAYBE A DIFFERENT IRRIGATION SYSTEM THAT IT DOESN'T GO ALL OVER, HITHER AND YON? IT'S REALLY NOT THE IRRIGATION SYSTEMS FAULT. SO YOU HAVE A VARIETY OF REASONS. HEADS GET WORN OUT. THEY GET THEY NEED TO GET REPLACED, THEY NEED TO GET READJUSTED. IF A MOWER IS DRIVING OVER THEM, THEY GET AN ADJUSTMENT. YOU KNOW, CONSTRUCTION THAT HAPPENS OUT THERE, SOMEBODY TEARS IT UP.

WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT. I MEAN, WE DO, WE DO HAVE A ONCE A MONTH PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE INSPECTIONS THAT TAKE PLACE. 41 IS IS ONE OF THE WORST SPOTS FOR IT. WE GET CALLS A LOT FOR THAT INDEED. AND YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE THOSE ARE SOME WIDE MEDIANS WITH A LOT OF TURF THAT REQUIRES SOME PRETTY EXTENSIVE IRRIGATION HEADS. BUT, BUT YEAH, WE, WE ADDRESS THOSE AS SOON AS WE FIND THEM. BUT YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S SOME STUFF THAT WE CAN TRY, MAYBE WITH IRRIGATION HEADS, DIFFERENT TYPES OF HEADS OR DIFFERENT SPRAYS. YEAH. ANYTHING. YES.

INEVITABLY HAVE TO GO BACK AND, AND GET THE CAR WASHED AGAIN AND AGAIN AND GO, OH BOY, THIS IS A PAIN IN THE NECK. YEAH, I KNOW, I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I UNDERSTAND IF YOU, IF YOU USE MY ROUTE TO WORK, IT'S EVERYTHING STRAIGHT. BECAUSE WHEN I SEE IT, I, I TELL THEM WHICH ROUTE IS THAT? 41. I TRIED THAT FOR A WHILE, BUT IT WAS TOO CROWDED. BUT NOW I CAN GO BACK TO THERE. THANK YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. BARTON. SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE WE NEED TO START LINING SOME OF OUR MEETINGS WITH RIPRAP. I'M PROBABLY THE LAST PERSON YOU NEED AN OPINION FROM IN REFERENCE TO THIS STUFF, BUT I CAN DO SOME MATH, AND I WOULD JUST MAKE AN OBSERVATION HERE, AND THAT IS THAT THE RIVER ROCK, AFTER TWO YEARS, YOU'RE AHEAD

[05:20:05]

OF THE CURVE, MONETARILY SPEAKING, WHEN YOU'RE COMPARING IT TO PINE STRAW OR PINE BARK.

SO AND THAT DOESN'T TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE MANPOWER TO HAVE TO DO THE PINE STRAW OR THE PINE BARK TWICE A YEAR, WHEREAS YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT WITH RIVER ROCK. SO THAT PROBABLY PUTS US WAY AHEAD OF THE GAME AFTER TWO YEARS. BUT I'LL ALSO TOSS IT OUT THERE THAT THE THE GRASS LOOKS SHARP AND CRISP. THAT IS A GOOD LOOK, BUT I AGREE WITH THE VICE MAYOR THAT HONESTLY, IT SHOULD FALL ON SOMEONE ELSE'S DECISION AS TO WHAT NEEDS TO GO WHERE, BUT IT PROBABLY DOES NEED TO BE A. A COMPILATION OF MAYBE ALL, YOU KNOW, ROCK AND GRASS AND IN SOME CASES MULCH. LIKE, YOU KNOW, LIKE YOU SAID, THE, THE GRASS IS GOING TO CONTAIN, FOR THE MOST PART, A LOT OF THAT MULCH THAT YOU HAD IN THAT PICTURE OF PORT ROYAL, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH LARGER MEDIANS AND SMALLER MULCH AREAS THAT ARE TOWARDS THE CENTER OF THOSE MEDIANS WITH A LARGE SWATH OF GRASS ON SURROUNDING IT, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO CONTAIN IT PRETTY DANG WELL. JIM, JUST SO I CAN. WHAT YOU SAID WAS THIS IS THE BID.

THIS IS WHAT THEY'VE COME BACK WITH. SO LIKE ON BANYAN, THAT ONE ROUNDABOUT THAT YOU CAN'T KEEP ANYTHING THERE. WE DON'T HAVE IT IN HERE. BUT TALKING WITH DAVE RIVERA HE'S GOING TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO THAT ROUNDABOUT SIZE. SO THE ROUNDABOUT SIZE IS GOING TO IT'S GOING TO SHRINK AS FAR AS THE PLANTING SPACE, BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE MORE OF PERVIOUS PAVER STUFF THAT CAN BE DRIVEN OVER BY THE. YEAH, A BIGGER APRON BECAUSE. THEY JUST DRIVE A STRAIGHT SHOT RIGHT THROUGH THERE. AND WITH ALL THE CONSTRUCTION THAT'S TAKING PLACE, EVERYBODY'S COMPLAINING ABOUT HOW MUCH TRAFFIC IS ON BANYAN BOULEVARD CURRENTLY. SO THEY'VE BEEN DRIVING OVER. IT'S HARD FOR THOSE BIG TRUCKS TO NAVIGATE THAT. SO THANK YOU.

OKAY, WAIT ONE SECOND. I HAVE PENMAN. OKAY. AND THEN RELATIVE TO OUR OUR LOVE FOR COLOR, ARE FLOWERING TREES DIFFICULT TO GET? HEATHER KNOW, AS OPPOSED TO PUTTING PLANTS IN THAT REQUIRE AS LONG AS WE DON'T GET ANY MORE HURRICANES. YEAH, I HAD TO CALL THEM AGAIN. YEAH.

NO, I MEAN, THE ROYAL POINCIANA THAT WE HAVE IN PLACES HAVE DONE EXTREMELY WELL. WE'RE GOING TO TRY A FEW THAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING. WE HAVE A FEW MORE SPECIES THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE GIVEN A WHIRL THIS THIS PLANTING SEASON TO SEE HOW THEY'RE DOING IT. IT IS ONE OF THOSE THINGS THOUGH, THAT ESPECIALLY ON BANYAN, THESE ARE NOT VERY WIDE MEDIANS. TRUE.

AND WE REALLY, REALLY AS A OVERALL THOUGHT PROCESS, NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE PUTTING THESE TREES IN THE PROPER GROWTH SPACE TO GIVE THEM, YOU KNOW, A GOOD, A GOOD CHANCE THAT WILL ALSO HELP AS WELL WITH THAT LIFTING THAT WE EXPERIENCE BECAUSE THEIR ROOTS WILL BE BETTER ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, TO MOVE AROUND AND SUCH. SO THROUGH BANYAN, I WOULDN'T RECOMMEND TRYING TO PUT ANY OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, LIKE A POINT SAND OR ANYTHING. IT'S JUST GOING TO BE TOO LEGGY AND NOT HAVE ITS PROPER SPACE. BUT IN THE ROUNDABOUT AREA, WE ARE GOING TO PUT A NICE BIG GUMBO LIMBO. YEAH, KEEP KEEP IN MIND THAT ADDS THE COLOR WITHOUT THE MAINTENANCE. YEAH. WELL NOT NECESSARILY ROYAL POINCIANA TREES GET PRUNED EVERY YEAR BECAUSE OF THE WAY THEY THEY GROW. SO, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY FALL INTO WHAT WE CALL OUR TROPICAL FLOWERING TRIM CYCLE, WHICH IS A LOT OF THOSE FLOWERING TREES, HONG KONG ORCHIDS, COPPER PODS, ROYAL POINCIANA GET PRUNED EVERY YEAR BECAUSE OF THEIR GROWTH PATTERN AND THEIR LEGGEDNESS AND STUFF. AND WE EVEN HAVE A FEW THAT ARE ON A TWO AND THREE YEAR PER YEAR CYCLE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THE ROYAL POINCIANA MOORING LINE AND US 41 HAPPIEST TREE ON THE PLANET. YEAH, THAT THING GETS PRUNED AT LEAST TWICE A YEAR.

AND KEEP IN MIND, IN BETWEEN THOSE PRUNINGS, I FIND BRANCHES IN JIM'S TRUCK BECAUSE HE'S GONE BY AND SNIPPED ONE. VERY HELPFUL. THANK YOU. I HAD SOME MISCONCEPTIONS THERE, THAT'S FOR SURE. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO YEAH, I WOULD CONCUR WITH COUNCILMAN KRAMER ABOUT THE LOOK OF THE PORT ROYAL. THE GRASS WITH THE I THINK, AND JUST THINKING ABOUT THE ECO FRIENDLY PORTION OF IT. GRASS ABSORBS WATER LIKE A SPONGE AND ALL THAT. WHEREAS YOU HAVE ROCK AND PINE, THEY GET WASHED OUT BY THE HEAVY RAIN. SO TROPICAL STORM. SO THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT MAY NOT BE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ECONOMICS OF. THAT MAY NOT BE AS GOOD AS YOU THINK. SO I WOULD USE TRY TO UTILIZE GRASS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE FOR THE BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND IT'S BETTER. I AGREE. I THINK MOVING FORWARD, WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO SPEND MORE TIME WITH THE DESIGN TEAMS. YOU KNOW, WHEN WE DESIGN THESE AND AND MAKE SURE WE SHARE THAT INFORMATION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO WE NEED TO LOOK OUT FOR SOME AREAS THAT WE COULD DO

[05:25:03]

THAT AS WELL, MORE THAN WE HAVE IN THE PAST FOR SURE. GREAT. THAT'S GOOD. GOOD NEWS. AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE WITH BANYAN THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE TURF MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE THE RIGHT THING FOR THIS ONE. SO WE WOULD NEED TO AT LEAST GET SOME KIND OF CONSENSUS ON IF IT'S GOING TO BE RIVER ROCK OR WHATEVER, AND, AND TRY TO MOVE FORWARD, BECAUSE WHAT I'M HEARING IS TO TRY TO BASICALLY AVOID HAVING THE MULCH ON THE SIDE OF THE CURBING IT MINIMAL AND TRYING TO CREATE SEPARATION.

BECAUSE WHAT WE ALSO DON'T WANT TO DO IS AS YOU RIDE THROUGH, IT LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW, NO OFFENSE TO ANYBODY WHO LIVES IN ARIZONA, BUT HAVE YOU BEEN TO ARIZONA? EVERYTHING'S ROCK, RIGHT? THEY CAN GROW GRASS AND WE DON'T WANT TO TURN EVERYTHING INTO A STONE QUARRY.

SO THAT'S THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE OF. AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THAT LOGIC, YOU'RE GOOD, I THINK. I MEAN, OF COURSE, I'M SORRY, HEATHER, BUT THAT SAINT AUGUSTINE PICTURE THAT'S UP THERE, IT'S LIKE YOU GET A NICE GREEN PATCH LIKE THAT AND PUT THOSE LEFTOVER THINGS. THERE'S LITTLE STICKS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO PUT SOME FLOWERING OR GUMBOS THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR THE RECORD, NOT MY PICTURE. HIS AND I CAN AGREE WITH YOU MORE.

OKAY, NOT A FAN OF STICKS EITHER. I DIDN'T THINK SO. SO I KNOW ROUNDABOUT WAS DONE.

OPTIONS. WE'VE ALL COVERED IT. MR. YOUNG, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU NEED? NO, I MEAN, FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I THINK WE HAVE CONSENSUS. IT NEEDS TO BE A MIXED VARIETY. THIS IS A GOOD TEST CASE TO SEE SOME ROCK THERE. I WANT TO THANK JIM FOR HITTING BOTH THE FLOODING AND THE MOUNTAIN CONSTRUCTION AND ALL THE OTHER PROBLEMS, BUT. I'M I'M I'M I'M TEASING. BUT BUT WE WILL. CHAD IS RIGHT. I WAS JUST KIDDING. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I THINK, YEAH, THAT GIVES US DIRECTION ON THIS ONE. WE'LL TRY TO MAKE IT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE AND OBVIOUSLY NOT GO WITH THE HIGHEST PRICE POINT GIVEN WHAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING IN THIS ONE.

BUT I THINK THAT GIVES US ENOUGH DIRECTION AND GOING FORWARD, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE AND I'LL JUST REMIND US TOO, THAT WE ALL LOVE TREES AND WE HAVE A TREE FILL IN PROGRAM THAT'S GOING TO BE ON YOUR CONSENT AGENDA TO HAVE A, I THINK, 300,000 ON THAT. WE SPEND 2 MILLION A YEAR TO PRUNE ROUGHLY JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, TO PRUNE AND HAVE THE CARE FOR THOSE TREES. SO WHETHER IT'S GRASS OR IT'S A TREE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE COSTS. AND SO IT'S REALLY COMES DOWN TO FINDING THAT RIGHT BLEND AND MAKING SURE YOU'RE ALL HAPPY WITH WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. SO I THINK THIS IS A GOOD TEST CASE AND WE MOVE FORWARD FROM THERE. I I'LL JUST SAY THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. MR. YOUNG AND STAFF. WE APPRECIATE IT. TRULY, TRULY APPRECIATE ALL YOUR EFFORTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MAYOR.

OKAY. AND WITH THAT, DO I HAVE A MOTION FOR THE RESOLUTION? UNLESS THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE? NO, I JUST MAKE THE MOTION. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE RESOLUTION, HIRING THE CONTRACTOR AND APPROPRIATING THE MONEY FOR THE BANYAN BOULEVARD MEDIAN RESTORATION PROJECT. SECOND, I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER, VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. MADAM CLERK, COUNCIL MEMBER KRULL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER. YES.

COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. MAYOR HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU,

[14.C) A Resolution Waiving the Competitive Bidding Process for the Purchase of Meridian Archer Barricades, as Provided in Section 2-663(1)(d)(3) of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples; Approving a Piggyback Agreement with Meridian Rapid Defense Group LLC., a Delaware Limited Liability Company, Authorized to Conduct Business in Florida, Pursuant to the General Services Administration (GSA) Contract No. 47QSWA19D001F in the Amount of $1,092,146.62; Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Piggyback Agreement; and Providing an Effective Date. ]

MAYOR AND COUNCIL. OKAY, THAT TAKES US TO 14 C. YES, THANK YOU, MAYOR. RESOLUTION WAIVING THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCESS FOR THE PURCHASE OF MERIDIAN ARCHER BARRICADES, AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 2-663, SUBPARAGRAPH ONE, SUBPARAGRAPH D THREE OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. CITY OF NAPLES APPROVING A PIGGYBACK AGREEMENT WITH MERIDIAN RAPID DEFENSE GROUP, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AUTHORIZED TO CONDUCT BUSINESS IN FLORIDA PURSUANT TO THE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, GSA CONTRACT NUMBER 47QSWA19D001F IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,092,146.62. AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE PIGGYBACK AGREEMENT AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU MAYOR. YES. SO JUST REAL QUICKLY, THE NEXT THREE ITEMS, JUST IN SUMMARY, IS A CONTINUATION OF OUR DISCUSSION RELATED TO SECURITY MEASURES IN OUR ROADS AND ET-CETERA. WHAT THIS ONE IS, IS THE AWARDING OF THE CONTRACT FOR THE ARCHERS THEMSELVES. AND THEN WE WERE HOPING TO HAVE, IF YOU RECALL, THE BARRICADES BEFORE YOU. AT THE SAME TIME, YOU COULD MAKE A DECISION. BUT WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE WITH THAT DISCUSSION

[05:30:02]

BECAUSE IT WASN'T READY. AND THEN THE THIRD ITEM THAT WILL COME UP WILL BE ABOUT ACTUALLY CREATING THE APPROPRIATIONS TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT, SHOULD YOU WISH TO DO THEM. SO I JUST WANTED TO PREFACE THAT THE ITEM BEFORE YOU THAT WAS JUST READ IS THE ARCHER'S, WHICH ARE THE ONES THAT WILL PROTECT THE PARK AND BE UTILIZED ON THE ROADS, ETCETERA. IT IS THE EQUIPMENT FOR THAT. AND I'LL TURN IT OVER TO CHAD. BUT I DID WANT TO GIVE YOU THAT, THAT OPENING ABOUT WHAT THE NEXT THREE ITEMS ENTAIL AND, AND HOW WE'LL WRAP THAT UP AS WE GO THROUGH THEM.

AND WITH THAT, I'LL TURN THE ARCHERS OVER TO CHAD. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAD MAYOR, COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR I'LL TRY TO MAKE THIS PRETTY BRIEF BECAUSE I KNOW WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION ALREADY ABOUT THE MERIDIAN ARCHERS, AND THAT WE DID PROJECT THAT APPROXIMATELY 72 ARCHERS WOULD BE WHAT WE WOULD NEEDS OF SECURG THE LOCATIONS THAT AROUND CAMBIER PARK, AS WELL AS OTHER AREAS WITHIN THE CITY THAT WE HAVE SOME EVENTS AT. THIS WAS A GSA CONTRACT THAT WE WENT OUT AND, AND SOUGHT AFTER AND, AND GOT THIS. THIS WOULD BE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT OR NOT TRYING TO FIGURE OUT. BUT WE HAVE A SOLUTION FOR THE, THE AREAS AND WHERE WE'RE GOING TO STORE THESE. SO THEY CAN BE DEPLOYED EASILY AND THEY CAN BE UTILIZED. I THINK THAT IF YOU'VE LOOKED AT OTHER CITIES, THESE THINGS HAVE BEEN VERY CRUCIAL IN THE PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE AND IN MY OPINION, THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY AND THE PEOPLE VISITING THE CITY ARE VERY IMPORTANT, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEIR SAFETY IS IS LOOKED AT AS A PRIORITY. SO THIS IS ANOTHER STEP IN THAT DIRECTION TO ALLOW US TO HAVE A SAFE CITY WHEN IT COMES TO EVENTS. SO ANY QUESTIONS THAT ANYBODY HAS, I'LL, I HAVE BLANKENSHIP AND THEN BENJAMIN. TOTALLY AGREE. WE WANT TO BE SAFE. AND I GUESS THIS IS FOR THE CITY TO PURCHASE AND OWN THESE INSTEAD OF THE SPECIAL EVENTS HOST HAVING TO RENT THEM SEPARATELY. SO CONSIDERATION BEING GIVEN TO SOME SORT OF COST RECOVERY FEE TO THESE SPECIAL EVENTS, BECAUSE IT WOULD BE, I THINK, A WHOLE LOT LESS THAN THEM RENTING THEM THEMSELVES, ESPECIALLY IF THEY HAVE A 5 TO 7 YEAR LIFE THAT YOU CAN SPREAD THE COST OVER. SO YEAH, SO, SO THE QUESTION AS WELL, THERE'S TWO POINTS. SO ONE IS, IS THE FIRST THING IS TO UTILIZE PROTECT CAMBIER PARK IMMEDIATELY. THE DELIVERABLE ON THAT IS 30 OR 45 DAYS. WE HAVE SET BEFORE YOU ON MAY 6TH TO HAVE THE SECOND HALF OF THE SPECIAL EVENT DISCUSSION, OF WHICH TIME WILL ALSO BE TALKING ABOUT THE POTENTIAL TO WHAT WE WOULD WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE TO INSTITUTE FEES ON THIS. TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE, IN ADDITION TO THE COST OF THE EQUIPMENT, WE ALSO HAVE TO HAVE EMPLOYEES THAT PUT THEM OUT AS OPPOSED TO. SO YOU TAKE SOME OF THEM ARE PAYING, I THINK, TO PROTECT CAMBRIA OVER HERE. THE ROUGH NUMBERS I'VE HEARD FROM, FROM THE CHURCH'S PERSPECTIVE, WAS 6000 PER WEEK. AND SO. BUT I THINK THAT YOU WOULD BE HARD PRESSED TO RECOVER SOME OF THE COSTS OF PUTTING IT OUT IN A IN A PORTION FOR ANYTHING LESS THAN PROBABLY A THOUSAND A WEEK. BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. AND SO THE EXPECTATION IS WE WOULD DO THAT AT THAT TIME. GREAT. JUST AS LONG AS WE CIRCLE BACK AND I RECOGNIZE THERE WILL BE A COST. BUT YEAH, IF THOSE NUMBERS ARE RIGHT, $1,000 IS A LOT BETTER THAN 6000. WE'VE GOT TO DECIDE HOW MUCH IS. YEAH, HOW MUCH IS PROTECTING AND HOW MUCH IS, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH ARE YOU PASSING ON? AND IT'S GOING TO BE A BLEND OF BOTH, RIGHT. AND THAT'S WHAT WE WE AT LEAST CONTROL THE REASONABLENESS OF THOSE COSTS WHERE WHEN WE DON'T OWN ANY EQUIPMENT, WE'RE AT THE MERCY AND WE'RE BOTH US AND OUR, OUR SPECIAL EVENT APPLICANTS ARE AT THAT MERCY. SO. OKAY. THANK YOU. AS LONG AS WE GET ALL COST, ALL IN STORAGE, MOVING THEM, SO ON AND SO FORTH. YEAH, THAT'S WHY WE WANT TO HAVE IT AS PART OF THAT CONVERSATION. WE KNOW WE NEED TO DO IT EITHER, YOU KNOW, EITHER WE HAVE ROADS WE NEED TO BLOCK. AND SO HAVING THE EQUIPMENT AGAIN, AND AS CHAD INDICATED, THAT'S WHAT GOES AROUND CAN BE CAMBIER PARK AND THAT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT. BUT IT'S NOT SUFFICIENT TO DO THE, THE FARMER'S MARKET, FOR EXAMPLE, AND CAMBIER PARK AND ANOTHER EVENT. SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, WE EVEN ONCE WE DO CAMBIER PARK, AND IF IT'S A MORE PERMANENT BOLLARD AND PLANTINGS, YOU STILL NEED THAT EQUIPMENT FOR OTHER EVENTS AND OTHER AREAS. SO IT IS NOT A DUPLICATION, OF COURSE, BUT IT DOES PUT US IN POSITION TO PIVOT AND BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE EVENTS AND SECURE THEM PROPERLY. OKAY. AND JUST SO LONG AS WE PASS SOME OF THOSE COSTS ALONG, THAT IS THAT IS THE INTENT TO HAVE A REALISTIC CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. I JUST FOR THE FOR PURPOSE OF MAKING SURE THE PUBLIC IS WELL INFORMED. THERE'S, THERE'S BEEN CONSISTENTLY BEEN

[05:35:04]

MISINFORMATION AND CONFUSION ABOUT BOLLARDS AND ARCHER BARRICADES AND FRENCH BARRICADES. I JUST WANTED TO THROW IT OUT THERE THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM ARE THE ARCHER BARRICADES, WHICH ARE THE VEHICLE STOPPING BARRICADES.

THEY'RE FOR SHUTTING DOWN STREETS THAT MIGHT BE ACCESSIBLE, STREETS TO THAT ARE ACCESSIBLE TO A STREET THAT MIGHT BE CLOSED OFF FOR AN EVENT. I BELIEVE FRENCH BARRICADES ARE THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM, AND I BOLLARDS ARE NOT ON HERE, BUT THAT IS GOING TO BE ON THIS PARTICULAR ON THIS DAY'S AGENDA. BUT THAT'S COMING BACK IN FRONT OF US QUICKLY, RIGHT? BECAUSE THAT'S ALSO YEAH, A BIG PART OF THIS. YEAH. WE HAVE A SMALL COMMITTEE WE MET ABOUT A WEEK AGO THAT IS TARGETING, DOING, GETTING THE LETTERS OF INTEREST OUT SO WE CAN GET SOMEBODY TO DESIGN IT, GIVE YOU A FLAVOR OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE AND COME BACK.

OKAY, GREAT. SO ANYWAY, WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE WITH THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM ARE THE VEHICLE STOPPING BARRICADES SO THAT PEOPLE CAN ASSOCIATE THE COST WITH WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT HERE. WITH THE ARCHERS. REPLACE SOME OF THE BOLLARD NEEDS, LIKE THE CLOSE OFF FIFTH AVENUE INSTEAD OF PUTTING BOLLARDS THERE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TEMPORARY ONES THAT PULL OUT. YEAH. ARCHERS. SO YEAH, THERE'S SOME SAVINGS TOO. YEAH. AND THERE'LL BE SOME EVENTS ON FIFTH THAT WE WOULD ALREADY HAVE THE EQUIPMENT FOR THAT.

THERE WOULD BE SOME SAVINGS THERE. BUT IN ADDITION TO THAT, WE STILL ARE GOING TO EXPLORE.

AND I MENTIONED THIS, I THINK AT THE LAST WHEN WE LAST DISCUSSED THIS, WE'RE STILL GOING TO EXPLORE WHETHER THERE ARE A FEW STREETS OR WHETHER THERE ARE A FEW STREETS TO WHICH WE SHOULD PUT THEM IN THE STREET, HAVE PERMANENT THAT IT'S MUCH EASIER TO HAVE THEM WHERE YOU CAN JUST SCREW THEM INTO THE GROUND AND THEY BECOME A SECURE BECAUSE BASED ON FREQUENCY ALONE AND THE EASE OF WHICH TO MOVE THESE AROUND. SO WE'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE PART OF WHEN WE COME BACK TO YOU WITH FOR CAMBIER PARK IS TO HAVE IDENTIFIED A COUPLE STREETS FOR THAT PILOT PROGRAM AS WELL. I WANT TO THANK YOU, GARY, TOO, FOR ALL YOUR EFFORT IN THIS. AND YOU'RE ON THIS RIGHT AWAY. AND I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE THE SECURITY OF OUR COMMUNITY IS PARAMOUNT. I MEAN, WE THIS IS REALLY A HIGH ISSUE FOR ME. APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. AND THE CREDIT GOES TO THE TO TO CHAD AND THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND EVERYBODY.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THAT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? I THINK THAT THE DEPLOYMENT WAS THE ONLY THING. AND YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NOT JUST ONE PERSON THAT KNOWS HOW TO DEPLOY THESE. YES. SO IT'S A THEY'RE HEAVY AND IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LITTLE BIT TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT. BUT THERE'LL BE A A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE WE TRAIN TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO DEPLOY THESE, WHICH IS KIND OF LINKED IN TO THE BOLLARD THING.

THE BOLLARDS ARE GOING TO BE EASIER IN THE LONG RUN DOWN THE ROAD. BUT THESE ALSO WE, WE LOOK AT SPECIAL EVENTS, BUT KEEP IN MIND THERE'S OTHER SITUATIONS WHERE THEY NEED TO PUT THESE BARRICADES IN PLACE. SO THIS CAN BE USED IN MULTIPLE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS. SO THIS IS I THINK IT'S BENEFICIAL AS A WHOLE WHEN IT COMES TO THIS. AND WILL WE NEED TO HAVE ANY OTHER VEHICLES WHEN THESE ARE IN PLACE? YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ANOTHER VEHICLE IN FRONT OF IT. LIKE FOR THE FARMER'S MARKET, IT WAS DESIGNED THAT THESE WOULD BE TAKE THE PLACE OF WHERE VEHICLES LIKE EVEN IN THE FARMER'S MARKET, THEY HAVE THIS, IT'S A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT VERSION, BUT THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE VEHICLES ANY LONGER. AND SO IT IS DESIGNED TO BE VEHICLE STOPPERS. AND SO THEREFORE THAT SHOULD BE ELIMINATED. JUST CONFIRMING THAT. OKAY. PERFECT RESOLUTION. MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE A RESOLUTION WAIVING THE COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCESS FOR THE PURCHASE OF MERIDIAN ARCHER BARRICADES, AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 2-6631D3 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. THANK YOU. MOTION BY KRAMER. SECOND. SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL.

COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRULL. YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES.

MAYOR HARTMAN. YES. THANK YOU. AND AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR EXPEDITING THIS AND MAKING IT A PRIORITY. WE TRULY APPRECIATE IT. TAKING US TO FORT TEAM D. SO ON THIS ONE,

[14.D) A Follow-Up Discussion and Consensus on Purchasing 1,400 Metal Barricades Using the State of Florida Contract No. 31160000-25-NASPO-AC with W.W. Grainger Inc. in the Amount of $178,397.06 for the City’s Needs During Events, Emergency Situations, and Construction Projects. ]

MAYOR, I'LL START OFF AGAIN. SO THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM. AND THIS IS THE METAL BARRICADES THAT WERE USED ON PARADE ROUTES. NOW A GOOD THING THAT HAS COME FROM FROM THIS DISCUSSION AND THE DELAY ORIGINALLY THE ESTIMATES WERE JUST OVER 300,000. THEN I HAD A FORMAL

[05:40:04]

QUOTE OF 252,000 ACTUALLY FROM THE SAME COMPANY. THEN WE WERE LOOKING AT OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND OTHER POTENTIAL WAYS, INCLUDING, BY THE WAY, HAVING THE AMAZON CORPORATE GIVE US A PRICE IF YOU CAN GET THEM IN BULK FROM THEM. SO WE WENT A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT WAYS ON THIS. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE PRICE HAS COME DOWN TO THAT WITH THE WITH THE LAST PRICE WE HAD WAS 252 FROM GRANGER, AND WE WERE ABLE TO FIND A CONTRACT AND ACTUALLY GET THEM AT THIS PRICE FOR 178 PIGGYBACKING AND EXPANDING ON THAT ONE. SO THIS GIVES US ENOUGH BARRICADES TO DO THE EXISTING PARADE ROUTE AS THEY'RE CURRENTLY STRUCTURED. AND IT DOES IT AS A PRICE OF AT 178,000. AND I WOULD REMIND YOU THAT WE IT WAS ROUGHLY 60 TO RENT. IS IT 60 OR 30 TO RENT THOSE. SO THE PARADE ROUTE FOR THAT ONE WAS JUST UNDER 50,000 PER OCCURRENCE. SO WE SPONSOR THREE PARADES A YEAR. AND SO FROM THAT STANDPOINT, THIS IS A COST EFFECTIVE EXPENDITURE REGARDLESS OF OUR CHARGING FOR THE FOURTH PARADE OR FINDING A COST RECOVERY FOR THAT ONE. SO IF BARRICADES ARE GOING TO EXIST, PURCHASING THEM IS, IS QUITE FRANKLY, JUST A NO BRAINER FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, FINDING STORAGE AND THEN DEPLOYING THEM COME WITH THEIR OWN COSTS, BUT IT CERTAINLY IS IS THE BEST WAY TO GO REGARDING THAT. AND I'VE PROBABLY SAID TOO MUCH ALREADY, CHAD, BUT YOU GO AHEAD IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU WANT TO ADD. I DON'T THINK THERE'S A WHOLE LOT LEFT TO SAY AS FAR AS THE CONTRACT AND THE AMOUNT. THIS WAS, AGAIN, US TRYING TO BE AS FRUGAL AS WE COULD WITH WITH MAKING THIS PURCHASE, AND WE WERE ABLE TO GET THAT DOWN. WE JUST COULD NOT GET THE CONTRACT ALL TOGETHER BY THE TIME TO BRING IT IN FRONT OF YOU. THAT WAS OUR ORIGINAL INTENT. YOU DO SEE THESE HERE AGAIN, I'VE TELL YOU ABOUT PICTURES. I SHOWED YOU PICTURES AGAIN, WE'VE DONE RESEARCH ON OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT ARE UTILIZING THESE. WE PROVIDED SOME OF THOSE WITH JUST IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, IT WAS ALMOST EVERY TIME THAT I WOULD LOOK UP SPECIAL EVENTS, IT SEEMED LIKE EVERYBODY WAS USING THEM. SO IT WAS VERY EASY TO FIND. I COULD PROBABLY FIND TEN MORE JUST IN A GOOGLE SEARCH WITHIN 15 MINUTES. SO THIS IS THIS WAS JUST SOME INFORMATION I THOUGHT WAS NEEDED. I THINK THIS IS A, A GREAT THING. I THINK IT TRYING TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE. THIS IS KIND OF THE, THE PEOPLE PROTECTOR. AND THEN YOU GOT THE VEHICLE PROTECTION. SO THIS IS TWOFOLD. SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER. THANK YOU. I HAVE KRAMER. THE QUESTION IS I JUST WANT TO VERIFY SOMETHING THAT I HAVE TALKED ABOUT WITH BOTH OF YOU. AND I HOPE THIS IS STILL THE CASE. ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF THIS AND HONORING THEM IS SO WHEN WE HAD CONTRACTORS DO IT, THEY'D SET THEM UP WHEN THEY SET THEM UP AND TAKE THEM DOWN WHEN THEY TAKE THEM DOWN. AND WE DIDN'T REALLY MESS WITH THEM BECAUSE OF LIABILITY ISSUES THIS WAY. THIS IS FOR MY PEOPLE THAT WORK ON FIFTH AVE THAT COULD NOT GET TO THE PARKING GARAGES WITHOUT WALKING TWO MILES. NOW WE CAN HAVE WALKWAYS UP UNTIL PARADE TIME WHERE PEOPLE CAN LEAVE WORK, GET TO PARKING GARAGES AND HAVE ACCESS DIRECT ACCESS TO THOSE. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. WE CAN PLAN THEM A LITTLE BIT BETTER BECAUSE THIS WAS THEY WERE THEY WERE DEPLOYED AT THE HOURS OF LIKE 2:00 IN THE MORNING. AND WE HAD, YOU KNOW, SOME STAFF THAT WAS WALKING THROUGH. BUT AT 2:00 IN THE MORNING, IMAGINE TRYING TO DIRECT WHILE THESE BARRICADES ARE GOING UP. SO THIS ALLOWS US TO KIND OF PLAN THIS A LITTLE BIT BETTER. WHEN WE GO TO DEPLOY THESE, WE CAN START TO GATHER THEM INTO A LOCATION THAT WE'VE ALREADY KIND OF SELECTED, WHERE IT WOULD BE OVER THE PERIOD OF A WEEK OR SO, AND THEN KIND OF GET THE GAME PLAN AND GO THROUGH AND DO THIS WHERE THAT CONTRACTOR WHO, WHEN WE RENT THEM, THEY WANT IT JUST LIKE THAT. SO IT'S LIKE WE'RE GOING TO SHOW UP, WE'RE GOING TO DEPLOY THEM. SO WE HAD TO SHUT THE STREETS DOWN WELL IN ADVANCE. SO THAT WAS THAT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A CHALLENGE TO COORDINATE. SO IT IS GOING TO BE A LOT EASIER TO BE ABLE TO COORDINATE THIS. NOW I'LL SAY EASIER. BUT YOU KNOW, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE STAFF THAT ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MANUALLY DO THESE. SO IT DOES I UNDERSTAND, BUT WE CAN ALSO MANAGE EXACTLY WHERE THEIR ACCESS POINTS AND PLACES TO CROSS, AND JUST PRACTICAL THINGS FOR FOLKS WHO WANT TO. THAT'S CORRECT. LIVE THEIR LIVES BEFORE AFTER THE PARADE. RIGHT, AM I CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT BEFORE AND AFTER BECOMES MUCH MORE MANAGEABLE AND HAVING OUTS, FOR LACK OF A BETTER EXPRESSION.

THERE WILL COME A POINT, THOUGH, AND I'D BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T SAY THIS BECAUSE MY MY POLICE CHIEF CARRIES A GUN, WHICH IS THAT AT SOME POINT IT'S A SECURE PARADE ROUTE. AND BUT IT YOUR YOUR BANDWIDTH TO CHANGE THAT, THAT IT'S NOT AS LONG OF A PERIOD OF TIME, ETC. I JUST

[05:45:05]

WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE ON THE SAME PAGE WITH THAT SO THAT THERE'S NO UNDUE EXPECTATIONS THAT ONCE THE PARADE BEGINS, YOU WON'T HAVE THIS BACK AND FORTH ON CERTAIN AREAS THAT WILL BE LIMITED JUST FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE DURATION. THE PARADE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I QUOTE THE CHIEF. IT'S A STATIC ENVIRONMENT, CORRECT? YES, THAT'S THAT'S RIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I SAID FLEXIBILITY AS THE PARADE ENDS COMING BEFORE AND AFTER THIRD, WE CAN START MOVING PEOPLE THROUGH. JUST HAPPENED.

EVERYTHING'S MANAGED MORE EFFICIENTLY. YES, SIR. FOR THE PUBLIC. YES. STATIC ENVIRONMENT.

WELL, AND I'M SURE THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME TYPE OF A POLICY, BUT THIS IS HOW WE'RE GOING TO DO IT WHEN WE ARE SETTING UP AND TAKING DOWN. DON'T FORGET ABOUT EMERGENCY AREAS, FOR WE HAVE TO HAVE EMERGENCY AREAS. AND I'M SURE WE WILL LEARN AS WE GO, BY THE WAY, AND MAKE NO MISTAKE, WE ARE GOING TO OUR FIRST. WE WILL HAVE TO CONTINUOUSLY EVOLVE AND LEARN ON THIS, THAT'S FOR SURE. WELL, YOU KNOW, I I'M GLAD THAT THE PICTURES SHOW THAT WE COULD MAINTAIN PEOPLE BEHIND THE RAILS. I THINK IT'S A SAD DAY THAT WE HAVE TO DO THAT. I'M WITH A COUPLE OF PEOPLE THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, LET'S HAVE OUR AMBASSADORS WALKING UP AND DOWN.

SO BUT IF THIS MAKES IT EASIER TO KEEP PEOPLE BACK. FROM CATCHING KRAMER'S KANDY, THAT MIGHT NOT MAKE IT TO THE. SORRY, I NEEDED A LAUGHTER AT 315. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT. I HAVE SCHULTZ, I JUST WANT TO KNOW IF THE STORAGE IS BAKED INTO THIS PRICE. SO THE STORAGE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS WE'VE GOT A LOCATION. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO A COUPLE OF THINGS TO, TO SECURE THAT AND MAKE SURE I DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT THE COSTS ARE GOING TO JUMP EXTREMELY HIGH ON THAT. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN MANAGE WITHIN POTENTIALLY WITHIN OUR BUDGET CURRENTLY. AND THAT'S ALL OF THE ALL OF THE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE JUST DISCUSSED TODAY. THEY THE PRICE WOULD BE BAKED IN FOR STORAGE. I HATE SAYING STUFF ABOUT MONEY WHEN THE. YES, THE MONEY MAN WAS OVER THERE. YES, IT WILL BE CONTAINED WITHIN THE EXISTING BUDGET. SHE WON'T HAVE AN ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENT FOR ANYTHING RELATED TO ITS STORAGE OR ANYTHING ELSE. THANK YOU SIR. WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO STORE IT IN CHAD'S OFFICE AND THEN HE'S GOING TO TAKE THE SUNSHINE ROOM. SO ARE WE. I WISH THEY WOULD FIT IN MY OFFICE, BUT WE DO HAVE IDENTIFIED LOCATIONS WHERE THEY THEY COULD GO. AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS GOING TO HAVE SOME MOVEMENT AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT IT, IT, IT, IT CAN BE DONE WITHIN WITH WHAT WE HAVE. I'LL MAKE IT WORK. FIGURED IT OUT.

WE'LL MAKE IT WORK. OF COURSE YOU WILL. THANK YOU. OKAY. THANK YOU. SCHULTZ. THE EMAILS THAT I GET, I ACTUALLY READ MOST OF THEM. ALMOST ALL OF THEM. THERE WERE SOME PEOPLE AFTER THE PARADE THAT WERE LIVID THAT THOSE BARRICADES WERE UP. AND I SHAKE MY HEAD.

THEY'RE SAYING THE KIDS FELT LIKE IT WAS A PRISON. IT WAS A TERRIBLE IMAGE FOR THE CITY TO BE PUTTING FORWARD. AND I'M LOOKING AT THAT AND SAY IT'S ALL IT TAKES IS JUST ONE MALIGN BAD ACTOR TO COME IN THERE RIPPING THROUGH WITH SOMETHING DUMB THAT WE DIDN'T ANTICIPATE WE'D BE ON THE HEADLINE NEWS. NAPLES DOESN'T PROTECT ITS RESIDENTS, SO I THINK THEY'RE A GOOD IDEA. SOME PEOPLE DO NOT, AND THAT'S THERE. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, OUR JOB IS TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTS. SO I THINK THEY'RE A GREAT IDEA AND SUPPORT ALL THE WAY. JUST SOME FOLKS, THEY BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S ABOUT THE AMBIANCE MORE THAN THE ACTUAL SECURITY FACTOR. YEAH. WELL, AND I CAN TELL YOU FROM EXPERIENCE THAT I WATCHED IT RIGHT IN FRONT OF CITY COUNCIL OR IN FRONT OF CITY HALL DURING THE CHRISTMAS PARADE JUST A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, WHEN A KID RAN OUT INTO THE STREET TO GET A PIECE OF CANDY THAT DIDN'T MAKE IT, AND THEY GOT UNDER THE FLOAT AND THE TIRE WAS COMING IN. THE MOM GRABBED HIM BY THE COLLAR AND YANKED HIM BACK. AND I WAS STANDING THERE WITH A COUPLE OF STAFF MEMBERS, AND I HADN'T SEEN IT. I'D HEARD POLICE DEPARTMENT SAY IT AT THAT MOMENT. NOT THAT I WASN'T A BELIEVER BEFORE, BUT I WAS A BELIEVER THEN. THE ONLY OPTION THAT YOU HAVE WITH REMOVING THE BARRICADES IS YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING IT'S OKAY TO MOVE INTO THE PARADE ROUTE, AND IT'S NOT OKAY TO MOVE INTO THE PARADE ROUTE. THAT WAS KRAMER'S THROW. WASN'T FAR ENOUGH. TWICE. MADAM MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, PLEASE. OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION ON PURCHASING 1400 METAL BARRICADES USING THE STATE OF FLORIDA CONTRACT. OH, WAIT ONE SECOND. THIS WAS DISCUSSION. SO IN THIS CASE, THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM. AS LONG AS I

[05:50:02]

HAVE CONSENSUS, WE'LL DRAFT IT AND WE'LL PUT IT ON THE MAY 6TH AGENDA FOR OUR CONSENT ITEM TO ACTUALLY OKAY, WE COULDN'T GET IT READY FOR THIS AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT, BUT WE WILL DO IT THEN. HOLD THE MOTION. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU THOUGH. OKAY. THANK YOU ONCE

[14.E) A Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget Adopted by Resolution 2025-15701 to Increase Appropriations from the Unappropriated Fund Balance Reserves of the 200 Debt Service Fund in the Amount of $1,270,544 Transferring Funds to the 340 Public Services Tax Fund for the Purchase of Special Events Security Equipment in the Amount of $1,270,544; And Providing an Effective Date. ]

AGAIN, THIS IS AWESOME. MOVING TO ITEM 14. E MR. MCCONNELL THANK YOU, MAYOR. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 20 2526 BUDGET ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION 2025 15701 TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE RESERVES OF THE 200 DEBT SERVICE FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,270,544. TRANSFERRING FUNDS TO THE 340 PUBLIC SERVICES TAX FUND FOR THE PURCHASE OF SPECIAL EVENTS SECURITY EQUIPMENT IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $1,270,544 AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. YEP. MAYOR, JUST FOR PURPOSES OF NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS, I'LL GIVE A BRIEF EXPLANATION WHEN YOU SAY IT COMES FROM THE 200 DEBT SERVICE FUND, THE PUBLIC SERVICE TAX FUND IS IT CONTAINS TWO PURPOSES WITHIN IT. ONE IS THE 200 FUND FOR DEBT SERVICE. ALL REVENUE GOES INTO THERE AND IT RESIDES THERE. UNTIL SUCH TIME YOU TRANSFER IT TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGET, WHICH IS THE OTHER PORTION OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE TAX. SO THE FIRST STEP IS JUST MOVING FROM THE 200 FUND TO THE 340. AND THE SECOND STEP IS MAKING IT LAWFULLY APPROPRIATED FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING THE EXPENDITURE, THE AGGREGATE VALUE OF THE TWO PREVIOUS ITEMS. WE WENT AHEAD AND WROTE THE SUPPLEMENT IN SUCH A WAY AS IT CONTAINS BOTH APPROPRIATIONS NEEDED TO, TO MAKE THE EXPENSE TO COVER THE EXPENSE FOR THE ARCHERS AND THE BARRICADES. AND THAT'S THE SUPPLEMENT THAT'S BEFORE YOU TODAY. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, IF I MAY, TO APPROVE. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 20 2526 BUDGET ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION 2020 5-15701. TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE RESERVES TO THE 200 DEBT SERVICE FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,270,544. TRANSFERRING FUNDS TO 340 PUBLIC SERVICES TAX FUND FOR THE PURCHASE OF SPECIAL SECURITY EQUIPMENT AND THE AMOUNT OF $1,000,270 $270,544. SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON I COULD HAVE DONE THAT CALL. YES. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP.

YES. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. CROWE. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES.

COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. MAYOR HARTMAN. YES. AND I JUST I'LL JUST SAY YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW GREAT IT IS TO HAVE A CITY MANAGER WHO UNDERSTANDS THE BUDGET AND UNDERSTANDS THE REQUEST OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY TO GET THIS DONE. SO AMAZING WORK. THANK YOU. WE NEED AT LEAST A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. SO IT'S 320.

THANK YOU. , WE'RE BACK FROM OUR SHORT BREAK. CONTINUING ON WITH 15 A MR.

[15.A) An Ordinance Amending Article 1, in General, of Chapter 36, Traffic and Vehicles, of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples for the Purpose of Providing for Definitions and Providing for Regulations Relating to Electric Bicycles; and Providing for Codification, Conflicts, Severability, Correction of Scrivener's Errors, Construction, Publication, and an Effective Date.]

MCCONNELL. YES. THANK YOU MAYOR. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE ONE IN GENERAL OF CHAPTER 36, TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF NAPLES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING OF PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS AND PROVIDING FOR REGULATIONS RELATED TO ELECTRIC BICYCLES AND PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, CONFLICT, SEVERABILITY CORRECTION OR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS. CONSTRUCTION, PUBLICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. MR. YOUNG.

THIS IS AN ORDINANCE OF TRYING TO REGULATE E BICYCLES ON THE SIDEWALK, AND WE'VE HAD SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT IT. AND I'M JUST GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO GEORGE AND DAN FOR THEIR INTRODUCTION. GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL DAN ORENSTEIN, CITY ENGINEER, STORMWATER MANAGER. SO CERTAINLY SEVERAL COUNCIL WORKSHOPS WERE HELD TO DISCUSS BICYCLE AND BICYCLE REGULATIONS. STAFF IS BRINGING BACK TO YOU A CORRESPONDING ORDINANCE TO UPDATE THE CITY CODE. REGARDING WHICH MEANS OF MOBILITY SHOULD BE ABLE TO RIDE ON THE SIDEWALK.

THE COUNCIL DIRECTED THAT BICYCLES SHOULD BE PROHIBITED, BUT BICYCLES SHOULD BE ALLOWED WHERE THEY ARE TODAY. IN ADDITION, COUNCIL DIRECTED THAT THE COUNTY'S E-BIKE REGULATIONS SHOULD BE FOLLOWED TO THE CORRESPONDING EXTENT WHERE THEY WOULD MEET THE COUNCIL'S INTENT.

THEREFORE, STAFF HAS PROPOSED THE ATTACHED ORDINANCE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THE ORDINANCE

[05:55:03]

REVISES CHAPTER 36 OF THE CITY CODE TO PROHIBIT E BICYCLES ON SIDEWALKS. BICYCLISTS MAY STILL PROCEED WHERE THEY ARE PRESENTLY ALLOWED. FURTHER, THE ORDINANCE INCLUDES THE COUNTY COUNTY'S E-BIKE REGULATIONS AS APPLICABLE, INCLUDING DEFINITIONS, STOPPING FOR SCHOOL BUSSES AND AN AGE RESTRICTION FOR CLASS THREE E-BIKES. LASTLY, WHILE WE ARE MODIFYING THE SECTION, A CORRECTION TO THIS CHAPTER WAS MADE TO REFLECT THAT PARADES RECEIVE CITY APPROVAL BUT ARE NOT ISSUED A SPECIFIC PERMIT BY THE CHIEF OF POLICE. WITH THAT, WE ARE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL QUESTIONS. I I'LL JUST MAKE THE COMMENT BECAUSE THIS IS THE THE PICTURE THAT'S ON THE SCREEN. THIS IS NOT ABOUT BIKE TOURS, WHICH IS THE PICTURE FROM THE SCREEN IS ABOUT BIKE TOURS, WHICH WILL BE COMING BACK TO COUNCIL. ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU. NO QUESTIONS. COMMENTS. YES, I HAVE SCHULTZ THEN BLANKENSHIP COMMENTS. THESE KIDS CAN BE A REAL NUISANCE AND THEY'RE GOING REALLY HIGH SPEEDS WITH NO LIGHTING. OFTENTIMES, AS I JUST SPOKE WITH MY COLLEAGUE, NO HELMETS, IT'S A IT'S A REAL MENACE, AT LEAST IN THE AREA I LIVE IN, WHICH IS A VERY ELDERLY AREA. SO I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH THE BIKE TOURS, IS THAT THAT'S A GOOD PART OF COMMERCE AND SHOWING VISITORS TO THE CITY OF NAPLES WHAT NAPLES LOOKS LIKE FROM THE BIKE.

BUT WE'VE GOT TO GET THESE GUYS UNDER CONTROL IN A SUBSTANTIAL, A SUBSTANTIAL WAY. SO WHATEVER YOU ALL CAN DO TO DO THAT. I'M ALL IN FAVOR OF THAT. THANK YOU. IF I READ IT PROPERLY, THERE'S A 16 YEAR AGE LIMIT NOW THAT'S BEING APPLIED. 16 YEAR OLD. THAT'S CORRECT. SO SIMILAR TO THE COUNTY, 16 YEAR OLDS AND UNDER WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RIDE A CLASS THREE E-BIKE ON A LOT OF THOSE KIDS BECAUSE WE'VE ALL SEEN THEM. ARE THERE MY WIFE'S FIFTH GRADE CLASS, THEY'RE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO 16. AND THAT THAT MEANS THAT THAT AT LEAST THAT PARTICULAR PART OF THIS OF THIS MENACE, OF THIS MENACING BEHAVIOR IS GOING TO BE ELIMINATED, DOESN'T SUGGEST THAT DOESN'T SUGGEST THAT ANYBODY OVER 16 ISN'T A MENACE ON THIS THING EITHER. I COULD I CAN PROMISE YOU, IF I HAD ONE, I WOULD BE CAPABLE OF BEING A MENACE, RIGHT? SO BEING OVER 16 DOES NOT PREVENT YOU FROM BEING A MENACE, BUT IT WILL AT LEAST TAKE THAT ADOLESCENCE ASPECT OF IT. LIGHTS MIGHT SHOULD BE MANDATORY OR A VEST WITH THE TAPE, THE REFLECTIVE TAPE THAT THEY CAN'T BE WITH A LIGHT HITTING THEM IN THE EVENING. THEY CAN'T BE JUST POPPING OUT OF PLACES LIKE THEY DO AT VERY HIGH SPEEDS. AND SOMEONE'S GOING TO GET WHACKED AND IT'S, THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME, SOME BAD THINGS IF WE DON'T AT LEAST FORCE REFLECTIVE TAPE HELMETS AND SOME LIGHTING MECHANISM TO BE SURE THAT THEY CAN BE SEEN BY ALL. THAT'S NOT INCLUDED IN THIS. ORDINANCE. CORRECT. REGULATIONS ON BEST OR TAPE OR CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. COULD IT BE ADDED? IF THAT'S THE COUNCIL DIRECTION WE CAN ABSOLUTELY ADD? IT IS NOT ENFORCEABLE. I MEAN, I KNOW THAT I KNOW THAT WHEN I ASKED THE QUESTION OF, I THINK LIEUTENANT O'REILLY, WHO WE HAD IN HERE WHEN WE HAD OUR LAST WORKSHOP OR DISCUSSION IN REFERENCE TO THIS, I HAD SUGGESTED THAT IT SHOULD BE REGULATED JUST LIKE A MOPED OR MOTORCYCLE, AND THEREFORE REQUIRE A DRIVER'S LICENSE, WHICH WE CANNOT DO BECAUSE IT IS NOT A MOPED OR MOTORCYCLE. SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW, CAN WE REGULATE THAT TYPE OF.

REQUIREMENT OR REQUEST WHAT IT DOES GIVE, IT GIVES THE OFFICER WHO SEES IT THE OPPORTUNITY TO STOP THEM. I'M ALL FOR IT. YEAH. AND CAN THEN JUST SAY, HEY DUDE, DID YOU KNOW THIS WAS REQUIRED TO DO THIS? IT GIVES THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO LEGALLY STOP THEM, TO TRY TO TELL THEM, YOU KNOW, YOU GOT TO GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER ON THIS THING. SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY WE'RE GOING TO PULL THEM OVER AND TICKET THEM. YEAH. BUT WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT THEY THEY GET IT AND THEY GIVE THE POLICE OFFICER A TOOL IN HIS TOOLBOX TO DEAL WITH IT. WELL, AND ANOTHER PART OF THE ORDINANCE WAS THEY HAVE TO ADHERE TO ALL THE TRAFFIC LAWS. YEAH. I WOULD JUST ADD A REFLECTIVE VEST, A LIGHT HELMET.

IT'S SOMETHING THAT REFLECTIVE, MEANING THE TAPE OF A CAR, THE TAPE REFLECTING THE LIGHT FROM A CAR HITTING THEM AND THAT THEY'RE WHIPPING ALONG AND THERE COULD BE A LIGHT ON THE FRONT OF THEIR BIKE IF THEY'RE SEEING THAT THE INVISIBLE GUYS ARE THE ONES THAT WERE HAVING PROBLEMS WITH AND THE SPEED WITH WHICH THEY GO. AND SO IF THERE'S A WAY TO, AGAIN, ALLOW AN OFFICER, AM I RIGHT? ALONG I WENT, WE SAW 3 OR 4 OF THESE GUYS AND, AND SERGEANT HORACE, I MEAN, HE, HE WAS JUST GOING, I DON'T HAVE TIME BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT ME PULLING THEM OVER.

BUT IF SOMEONE JUST GOES WHIPPING THROUGH, ENFORCES A CAR TO BLAST US UP, YOU KNOW,

[06:00:05]

ENDANGERING A SEASONED CITIZEN, THAT COULD BE A PROBLEM. SO I'D LIKE TO ADD SOME THAT LANGUAGE IF IT GIVES THE POLICE ANOTHER AGAIN, ARROW IN THE QUIVER. YEAH. JUST SO EVERYBODY KNOWS, THIS IS THE FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE, WHICH MEANS WE HAVE A SECOND READING. SO IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. AND MATTHEW, PLEASE CORRECT ME. WHOEVER MAKES THE MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS FIRST READING CAN ADD THAT LANGUAGE INTO THEIR MOTION. AND THEN AND THEN IT WOULD BE A PART OF AUTOMATICALLY WHEN THE SECOND READING COMES AROUND AT THE NEXT MEETING. THAT SOUNDS GREAT. SO BECAUSE I HAVE HEARD THE SAYING THAT PEOPLE CANNOT SEE, ESPECIALLY IN THE EVENING, THE WORKERS WHO WEAR BLACK AND THEY'RE HARD TO IDENTIFY. BUT IS THAT SO? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE OVER 16 PEOPLE UNDER 16. WELL, BECAUSE I NEED TO TALK TO I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU CITE AN EIGHT YEAR OLD OR MAYBE YOU CAN. WELL, I WOULD CHILDREN, IF YOU'RE 16, IF YOU'RE UNDER 16 OR MAYBE 16 OR UNDER, I DON'T REMEMBER ONE OF THOSE TWO. YOU BY LAW, YOU HAVE TO WEAR A HELMET. THAT'S STATE LAW FOR FLORIDA. NOW THEY CAN, WHEN THEY STOP THEM, THEY CAN CITE THEM AS A CITATION. YOU GO TO COURT AND ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS SHOW A RECEIPT THAT YOU PURCHASED A HELMET. THERE'S NO FINE. THERE'S NO WHATEVER. I KNOW THAT THAT'S THE CASE FOR HELMETS IN FLORIDA. NOW, WHETHER OR NOT WE CAN TELL THEM THEY GOT TO WEAR SOME REFLECTIVE. I KNOW THERE ARE ALSO JUST THIS FROM BEING A DRIVER AT DEPARTMENT HEAD. I NEVER TAUGHT IT, BUT I KNOW THIS STUFF CAME UP. REFLECTIVE MATERIALS ON THE ACTUAL. THE BICYCLES THEMSELVES ARE REQUIRED FRONT AND REAR AND PEDALS OR WHATEVER. WHATEVER IT IS, IT'S. THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS ALREADY. YEAH. WE WOULD NEED, YEAH, WE WOULD NEED TIME TO, TO, TO LOOK INTO THIS ON WHAT'S ALLOWED, RIGHT, ALLOWED OR NOT. BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, GENERALLY SPEAKING, YES, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO MAKE CHANGES AS LONG AS YOU DON'T CHANGE THE TITLE FROM FIRST TO SECOND READING. AND THEN YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD RESEARCH TO SEE IF THAT CHANGED. THAT WE MIGHT HAVE APPROVED HERE TODAY WOULD BE AN ACCEPTABLE CHANGE AT OUR SECOND READING. WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW MR. YOUNG FEELS, BUT I THINK OUR RESEARCH MAY HOLD UP. SECOND, I MEAN, IF YOU GUYS ARE ADAMANT THAT YOU WANT THIS FOR SURE INCLUDED, THEN I WE WOULD NEED TO RESEARCH THE ISSUE, COME BACK TO YOU, SAY SORRY IT DIDN'T WORK AND THEN BRING SECOND READING. LIKE CAN WE I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK TO MY BICYCLIST TO MY RIGHT, BUT HE WAS JUST ADDRESSING THE LAWS. OH, GOOD. I MEAN, WHAT WHAT KRAMER SUGGESTING ON THE BICYCLE. IF THAT'S LEGAL WITHIN BICYCLES, THEN THAT, BUT I AGREE, TRYING TO MAKE SOMEBODY WEAR TAPE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. BUT IF IT FITS WITH THE BICYCLE LAWS. BUT OUR THE EXPERT. YES. ALISON PICKETT, THANK YOU. HEY, GOOD AFTERNOON, ALISON PICKETT. FOR THE RECORD, I JUST WANTED TO TO TO NOTE AS PART OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES UNDER IT'S 316 2065. SO MATTHEW, CORRECT ME IF I'M INCORRECT IN THIS, BUT BICYCLES ARE REQUIRED PER THE STATUTES TO FROM EACH. EVERY BICYCLE IN USE BETWEEN SUNSET AND SUNRISE SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH A LAMP ON THE FRONT, EXHIBITING A WHITE LIGHT VISIBLE FROM A DISTANCE OF AT LEAST 500FT TO THE FRONT, AND A LAMP AND REFLECTOR ON THE REAR, EACH EXHIBITING A RED LIGHT VISIBLE FROM A DISTANCE OF 600FT TO THE REAR. AND THEN IT GOES ON TO TO STATE A BICYCLE OR ITS RIDER MAY BE EQUIPPED WITH LIGHTS OR REFLECTORS, IN ADDITION TO THOSE REQUIRED BY THE SECTION. A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER MAY ISSUE A BICYCLE SAFETY BROCHURE AND VERBAL WARNING TO A BICYCLE RIDER WHO VIOLATES THIS SUBSECTION. SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT THAT IS IN THE STATUTES. I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME BECAUSE OF IT'S CONSIDERED A BICYCLE THAT THAT I WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WOULD BE APPLIED. BUT. MATTHEW. PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. IT'S IN THE STATE LAW. IT'S YEAH, IT'S SECTION 316 .2065. YOU WANT TO STAY HERE? NO. THAT'S GOOD. YEAH. THAT'S THAT'S A VALID LAW. OKAY. I JUST I MEAN, SO LIKE IF IT'S ALREADY THERE, THEN IT GIVES THE ABILITY FOR, I DON'T WANT TO DEFAULT FOR THE POLICE, BUT I'M ASSUMING THEY CAN VIOLATE PEOPLE ON STATE STATUTES. WHAT IS IT? REFERENCE HELMETS. YEAH, I THINK HELMETS. I THINK THAT YOU WERE CORRECT AS FAR AS THE THE AGE ON THE HELMETS. I AM TRYING TO FIND THIS AS I'M TALKING RIGHT NOW THOUGH. SO MY APOLOGIES, BUT I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. AS FAR AS A BICYCLE RIDER, A PASSENGER WHO IS UNDER 16 YEARS OF AGE MUST WEAR A BICYCLE HELMET THAT IS PROPERLY FITTED AND IS FASTENED SECURELY UPON THE PASSENGER'S HEAD BY A STRAP THAT MEETS THE FEDERAL SAFETY REQUIREMENTS. WELL, I'LL SAY THAT THEN. THE HELMET

[06:05:01]

WOULDN'T WOULDN'T APPLY TO THIS LAW BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO BE OVER 16 TO RIDE ONE OF THESE THINGS HERE, SO THAT THAT ELIMINATES THE NEED FOR ANY LANGUAGE FOR THE HELMET AND ALSO ELIMINATES THE THE ABILITY TO CITE ANYONE BECAUSE THEY IF THEY'RE OVER SIX, IF THEY'RE UNDER 16, THEY'RE NOT ON THESE THINGS. WELL, CLASS. YES, YES. CLASS ONE AND TWO IS OKAY IS NOT. SO.

GOT IT. SARAH. MY QUESTION IS I THINK WE JUST GRAZED OVER THIS. WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING LIKE IT'S A VERBAL WARNING. SO WHAT ARE THE TEETH LIKE? WHAT IS THERE A PENALTY THAT COULD BE UNCOMFORTABLE ENOUGH THAT PEOPLE WILL COMPLY BECAUSE A VERBAL WARNING ISN'T PROBABLY GOING TO CHANGE BEHAVIOR OR THEY DON'T KNOW. YES, IT'S POSSIBLE THEY MIGHT. EDUCATION IS ALWAYS I MEAN, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT LIKE BIRD BARTON. I'M KIDDING. THEIR PARENTS COULD BE CITED, BUT I MEAN, IF YOU. YEAH. THAT'S RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW. I'M ASKING A QUESTION FOR OUR ATTORNEY. LIKE, IS THERE. THEIR PARENTS COULD BE YOU COULD YOU COULD ADD, YOU COULD ADD A VIOLATION SECTION. WE HAD TO FIND. YEAH. YOU COULD, YOU KNOW, FOR FOLKS THAT ARE LIKE, I JUST DON'T THINK THERE'S NO WAY OF TRACING THEM TO GIVE THEM A VERBAL WARNING.

YOU DON'T HAVE THE, THE ONE THING I WILL SAY, IF YOU RECALL, A COUPLE OF MONTHS BACK WHEN WE KIND OF SEPARATED THE MICROMOBILITY DISCUSSION IN THE ORDINANCE FROM THE BICYCLE, I MEAN, THIS SECTION, BECAUSE THESE DEFINITIONS ARE GOING TO BE WHERE MICROMOBILITY IS. THIS IS GOING TO COME BACK AT SOME POINT. WE ALSO HAVE TO TALK ABOUT MICRO TRANSIT, WHICH IS A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION. A LITTLE GOLF CARTS. BUT YOU KNOW, WE COULD WE COULD ALWAYS PUT THE DISCUSSION ON VIOLATIONS OF THE WHOLE SECTION, INCLUDING MICRO. WE CAN DISCUSS IT AT THAT TIME AS WELL. OKAY, JUST A THOUGHT. I'M OF THE MIND TO GET THIS THING ROLLING DOWN THE HILL AND THEN IF WE NEED TO MODIFY IT LATER, DO, BUT I DON'T WANT TO HOLD IT UP BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO. YEAH. SO MAKE IT PERFECT. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? IT'S ALREADY REFERENCED IN THE RESOLUTION AND ANYTHING IS, IS MORE TEETH OR VIOLATIONS OR EDUCATION. I MEAN, CAN COME BACK FOR SECOND READING. IF WE CAN GET TO IT. CORRECT. I MEAN, IF IT'S OKAY WITH COUNCIL SO THAT WE DON'T STOP THIS SECOND READING, IF, IF, WHEN WE BRING BACK THE MICRO MOBILITY, MICRO TRANSIT ASPECTS, SINCE IT'LL BE A SIMILAR SECTION, WE CAN ALWAYS INCLUDE A VIOLATION SECTION IN THAT WHICH I'VE DONE BEFORE IDENTIFYING A FINE. AND SO THAT WE AT LEAST GET THE ELECTRIC BICYCLES MOVING. OKAY, THAT'D BE GREAT, I THINK. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS I DID? I HAD ONE PUBLIC SPEAKER. HE DIDN'T MAKE IT THROUGH OUR LENGTHY DAY WHO WAS JUST CONCERNED ABOUT SAFETY ASPECTS. SO. NO FURTHER DISCUSSION. MOTION. I'M SORRY, DOCTOR GEORGE, DID YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? I'M SORRY. WE I THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, ALL GOOD, MA'AM. PERFECT. PERFECT.

PERFECT. DIDN'T MEAN TO IGNORE YOU. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE FIRST READING OF THIS. OF THIS ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE ONE IN GENERAL OF CHAPTER 36, TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF NAPLES. FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS AND PROVIDING FOR REGULATIONS RELATING TO ELECTRIC BICYCLES.

SECOND. AND I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER KRAMER AND A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON, DO I NEED CAN I TAKE A ROLL? CAN I JUST DO A SIGN OR SHOULD I DO YOU HAVE TO DO ROLL CALL, MADAM CLERK, VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRULL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. SCHULTZ. YES. MAYOR HEIDEMANN. YES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

[15.B) An Ordinance Amending Article 2 Titled Council, Section 2.5(1) of the City Charter Pertaining to the "Salary" of the Mayor and Councilmembers of the City of Naples to Adjust the Salaries of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Naples; Providing for a Referendum on the Question of Approval of the Proposed Amendment in English and Spanish; Providing for Filing the Revised Charter as Amended with the Florida Department of State; Providing for Coordination with the Supervisor of Elections of Collier County, Florida; Providing for Conflicts; Severability; Correction of Scrivener’s Error; Construction; Publication; and an Effective Date.]

THAT WAS EASY. NOW WE'RE MOVING TO 15 B, WHICH WAS WAIT, THERE'S MY YEAH. 15 B AS IN BOY.

SORRY. ONE SECOND. IPAD NOT WORKING. YEAH. YES. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE TWO TITLED COUNCIL SECTION 2.5, SUBPARAGRAPH ONE OF THE CITY CHARTER PERTAINING TO SALARY OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES TO ADJUST THE SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, PROVIDING FOR A REFERENDUM ON THE QUESTION OF APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH, PROVIDING FOR FILING THE REVISED CHARTER, AS AMENDED, WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE PROVIDING FOR

[06:10:03]

COORDINATION WITH THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA.

PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, CORRECTION OF SCRIVENER'S ERRORS, CONSTRUCTION, PUBLICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU. QUESTIONS. COUNCIL. WE HAVE HAD THIS DISCUSSION AND WE HAD A COMMITTEE, AS I RECALL, RIGHT. TOOK A LOOK AT THIS THIS YEAR THAT LOOKED AT OUR COMPENSATION. YES, YES. OKAY. SO JUST MAY I. YES, PLEASE. ESPECIALLY FOR THE NEW COUNCIL MEMBERS. SO THIS DISCUSSION BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE MEETS EVERY FOUR YEARS PURSUANT TO CHARTER. THEY MADE A RECOMMENDATION WHICH CITY COUNCIL CAN EITHER APPROVE OR DENY. THEY DID MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO INCREASE THE MONTHLY STIPEND ALONG WITH THE SALARIES. THIS WAS IN TOWARDS THE END OF I THINK IT WAS TOWARDS THE END OF LAST YEAR. I THINK THEY MET IN 25. CORRECT. I THINK IT WAS LIKE NOVEMBER RECOMMENDATION CAME IN DECEMBER.

I'M GOING OFF MEMORY, BUT PRETTY CLOSE. IT WAS MY DETERMINATION THAT ANY CHANGES TO THE CHARTER THAT ARE NOT ONE OF THE EXEMPTIONS LISTED IN FLORIDA STATUTE REQUIRE REFERENDUM, BECAUSE THE SALARIES ARE ACTUALLY IDENTIFIED BY NUMBER IN THE CHARTER. THEN IT WAS MY OPINION THAT THESE HAVE TO GO TO REFERENDUM OF THE VOTERS.

THEREFORE, AS YOU'LL SEE WITH THE ORDINANCE IN THE BACKUP MATERIAL, THERE IS ALSO A REFERENDUM QUESTION IN THERE. I THINK IT WOULD BENEFIT COUNCIL TO JUST REVIEW IT, TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE ON THE BALLOT. AGAIN, THIS WILL COME FOR SECOND READING.

WE'RE WELL BEFORE THE TIME THAT WE NEED TO PROVIDE THIS TO THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS. BUT WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. AND THEN THERE'S A SUBSEQUENT REFERENDUM QUESTION AFTER THIS RELATED TO THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE, WHICH I'LL GET TO. BUT THIS TERM WE WERE GOING TO GO AND THERE WAS GOING TO BE FOUR REFERENDUM QUESTIONS BASED ON THE CONVERSATION THAT MADAM CLERK HAD WITH SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, WE DECIDED THAT FOUR IS KIND OF A LOT. SO LET'S FOCUS ON THESE TWO. THE OTHER TWO WERE FILLING A VACANCY.

REMEMBER, THE CHARTER CURRENTLY SAYS YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIAL ELECTION WITHIN 60 DAYS. AND THEN THE OTHER ONE WAS BASED ON SOME OF THE COMMENTS WE HEARD FROM THE WOMEN LEAGUE OF VOTERS MOVING THE POTENTIAL ELECTION DATE IN A NON-PRESIDENTIAL YEAR, BUT WE DID CONFIRM THAT BOTH OF THOSE CAN HAPPEN IN MARCH OF 28. FOR THE NEXT TERM, THERE WILL BE NO ELECTION IN 27. AREN'T YOU TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM THE SPECIFIC DOLLAR AMOUNT SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK EVERY YEAR? IS THAT WHAT'S DOING? THAT'S THE NEXT ONE. YEAH. SORRY. NO WORRIES. MY UNDERSTANDING THIS IS KIND OF NEW THAT THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A WHILE, AND THEY MADE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE PAST THAT COUNCIL EITHER APPROVED OR DISAPPROVED, AND IT DIDN'T GO TO A VOTE. SO CAN YOU HIGHLIGHT WHAT CHANGED? LIKE I THINK YOUR CITY ATTORNEY CHANGED. I'M SURE OUR CITY ATTORNEY, I KNOW THAT. NO, THAT'S REALLY THE ONLY THING I STATE LAW THAT DROVE THIS. I CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHY IT DID NOT GO TO REFERENDUM.

I'VE BEEN TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, BUT I DO KNOW THIS LANGUAGE. THIS STATUTE CAME IN PROBABLY IN THE THE LATE 70S, EARLY 80S. SO MAYBE LEADING UP TO IT IT WASN'T. BUT I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU AS TO WHY IT DIDN'T. HAD I BEEN THERE SIX YEARS AGO, I WOULD HAVE SUGGESTED IT THEN. IT JUST MAY BE A COMMUNICATION CHALLENGE IF PEOPLE AREN'T USED TO SEEING THIS, THAT THEY HAVEN'T VOTED ON IT BEFORE. IF THEY'VE LIVED HERE A LONG TIME, THEY MAY WONDER WHY THEY'RE BEING ASKED TO VOTE ON IT NOW. SO WE. SO THE WORDING MUST BE VERY ON THE BALLOT, MUST BE VERY CLEAR TO HAVE THAT NOT BE A CONCERN. AND THE WORDING THAT. YES. YES. IN MY EXPERIENCE IN MICHIGAN. ANYTHING TO DO WITH COMPENSATION FOR PUBLIC EMPLOYEES WILL JUST GET DEFEATED OUT. OF COURSE, THEY JUST PUBLIC JUST GENERALLY SAYS THEY'RE LUCKY TO HAVE A JOB. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE INCREASING IT. JUST BE PREPARED.

THAT MIGHT THAT MIGHT GET FLIPPED ON THE OTHER WAY. WELL, I WILL SAY WITH MY EXPERIENCE IN THE CITY OF NAPLES AND FLORIDA IN GENERAL, EVERYBODY SAYS WE DON'T GET PAID ENOUGH.

SO WHATEVER THAT MEANS, YOU GET PAID ANYTHING, IT AIN'T ENOUGH. WE'LL SEE IF THEY MEAN IT OR NOT. YEAH, EVERYBODY KNOWS THE COST OF LIVING HAS GONE UP HERE. BUT ALSO, IN MY RECOLLECTION, THIS IS THE FIRST POTENTIAL INCREASE IN BASICALLY FIVE YEARS BECAUSE THE LAST ONE, FOUR YEARS AGO DIDN'T HAVE THE SALARY INCREASE DATA FOR EMPLOYEES. SO THEY ONLY DID THREE YEARS WORTH OF INCREASES THAT WERE PASSED. SO AM I RIGHT? I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT, SIR.

SO IT LOOKS, YOU KNOW, IF YOU DID A STRAIGHT PERCENTAGE INCREASE, IT WOULD LOOK BIG.

[06:15:05]

BUT IT'S REALLY A FIVE YEAR INCREMENT. NOTICE. I JUST YEAH, MAYBE GO TO $0.45 AN HOUR. WELL I'M FACETIOUS. SO ARE WE TALKING ABOUT COMMUNICATION OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE. WHAT ARE YOU REFERENCING VICE MAYOR? MAINLY THAT THE COMMUNICATION AROUND THIS NEEDS TO BE VERY CLEAR. AND I MEAN, THE BALLOT WORDING ITSELF SEEMS FINE TO ME. IT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD, BUT JUST TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE AHEAD OF TIME, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY'RE BEING ASKED TO VOTE ON AND WHY. IT JUST NEEDS TO BE PRETTY CLEAR. COULD IT BE A CAVEAT BE ADDED THAT IT'S BEEN THIS MANY YEARS SINCE THIS ISSUE WAS LOOKED AT AND PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE, FRAME OF MIND.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING FOR, IS WHAT'S THE FRAME OF REFERENCE THAT THE PUBLIC HAS? MAYBE THAT. YEAH. AND TALK ABOUT THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE. PEOPLE MAY NOT REALIZE THAT'S SEVEN PEOPLE THAT ARE VERY INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY. THEY KNOW WHAT COUNCIL DOES THERE.

THEY'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME. THEY'RE RESPECTED. THEY THEY'RE EXPERIENCED IN THEIR BUSINESS CAREERS. AND, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T MAKE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS LIGHTLY. SURE, I TOTALLY AGREE. WELL, IT IS EASY ENOUGH FOR US TO SEND OUT A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT SOMEHOW THROUGH OUR COMMUNICATIONS AND COVER IT THROUGH THAT. EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. PLEASE READ THIS INFORMATION EDUCATION. SO WITH THAT 15 IS THERE ANY CHANGES, ANY CONCERNS TO THE ORDINANCE? SO YOU NEED. NO, IT'S AN ORDINANCE. SO THERE'LL BE TWO READINGS. SO RIGHT. THIS WAS FIRST AND THEN AND THEN SECOND. BUT I DO WANT TO JUST MENTION IT BECAUSE IT CAME UP. I HAVE TO LOOK INTO CAN'T REMEMBER. THERE ARE SOME RESTRICTIONS ON WHAT YOU CAN USE PUBLIC FUND WISE FOR CITY ISSUED CHARTER AMENDMENTS. SO I JUST BEFORE WE GET TOO FAR DOWN THE ROAD OF LIKE BLASTING THIS AND OH, I WOULDN'T SUGGEST BLASTING IT, NOT BLASTING IT, BUT, BUT I JUST BECAUSE IT CAME UP ON INFORMING THE PUBLIC, I JUST WANTED YOU ALL TO KNOW THAT I'M GOING TO NEED A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO LOOK AT WHAT THE PARAMETERS ARE SO THAT WE'RE OPERATING IN ACCORDANCE. THANK YOU FOR PROTECTING US ON THAT.

WITH THAT, THANK YOU. COUNCIL. DO I HAVE A MOTION OR. SURE. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE TWO TITLED COUNCIL SECTION 2.51 OF THE CITY CHARTER PERTAINING TO THE SALARY OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES TO ADJUST SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NAPLES. DO I NEED TO CONTINUE, MATTHEW? NO. I READ THE TITLE. I HAVE A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. SECOND, I HAVE A SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL MEMBER SCHULTZ.

YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. YES. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRUL. YES. MAYOR HARTMAN. YES. SO PASSES

[15.C) An Ordinance Amending Article 2 Titled Council, Section 2.5(1) and 2.5(2) of the City Charter Pertaining to the "Salary" of the Mayor and Councilmembers of the City of Naples to Give the Power to Adjust the Salaries of the Mayor and Council to the Blue Ribbon Committee of the City of Naples; Providing for a Referendum on the Question of Approval of the Proposed Amendment in English and Spanish; Providing for Filing the Revised Charter as Amended with the Florida Department of State; Providing for Coordination with the Supervisor of Elections of Collier County, Florida; Providing for Conflicts, Severability, Correction of Scrivener’s Error, Construction, Publication and an Effective Date.]

UNANIMOUSLY. THAT TAKES US TO 15 C. MR. MCCONNELL. YES. THANK YOU MAYOR. SORRY, THE IPAD IS.

NOT WORKING. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE TWO TITLED COUNCIL SECTION 2.5, SUBPARAGRAPH ONE AND 2.5. SUBPARAGRAPH TWO OF THE CITY CHARTER PERTAINING TO THE. IT'S THE SAME ONE I READ. YEAH IT IS. SORRY. MY APOLOGIES. I THINK YOU HAD IT. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES WILL START FROM THE BEGINNING. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE TWO TITLED COUNCIL SECTION 2.5, SUBPARAGRAPH ONE AND 2.5. SUBPARAGRAPH TWO OF THE CITY CHARTER PERTAINING TO THE SALARY OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES TO GIVE THE POWER TO ADJUST THE SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL TO THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF NAPLES, PROVIDING FOR A REFERENDUM ON THE QUESTION OF APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IN ENGLISH AND SPANISH, PROVIDING FOR FILING THE REVISED CHARTER, AS AMENDED, WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF STATE PROVIDING FOR COORDINATION WITH THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY CORRECT CORRECTION OF SCRIVENER'S ERROR, CONSTRUCTION PUBLICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WELL, IS THAT SOME. OH, SORRY, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD ADD THE LANGUAGE OF EXISTING BECAUSE YOU'RE AMENDING IT, BUT YOU'RE NOT. IT'S ALREADY AN EXISTING.

[06:20:08]

SALARY. SO IT'S NOT. I MEAN, BECAUSE NOW I UNDERSTAND THE CONFUSION IN IT. TO ME, IT WAS JUST AN EASY THING. BUT IF IF YOU PUT VERBIAGE THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE AMENDING THE EXISTING CODE TO CLARIFY THE STATE LAW, I GUESS YOU SAID THERE WAS A CHANGE OR SOMETHING.

WELL, THE TITLE DOES THAT LOOK VALID? 15 C DOESN'T REFER TO THE. SO WE DID. WE DID DISCUSS THIS INITIALLY AND WE TALKED ABOUT IT BEING ONE QUESTION. BUT THEN IF SOMEONE VOTES NO TO THE ONE QUESTION, BOTH DIE. SO IT MADE SENSE TO DEAL WITH THE SALARY INCREASE BECAUSE SOMEONE COULD SAY, NO, I DON'T WANT THE SALARY INCREASE, BUT I'M OKAY WITH BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE DOING THIS BY ORDINANCE. SO WE SEPARATED THE TWO INTO TWO REFERENDUM QUESTIONS. OKAY, NO FURTHER DISCUSSIONS. COMMENTS? SURE. EVERYONE'S OKAY WITH THIS? ALL RIGHT. I HAVE TO ASK. I KNOW YOU'RE SMARTER THAN ME. YOU ALREADY. THERE'S A REASON WHY WE CAN'T PUT ON THEIR PARENTHETICALLY OR WHATEVER. THE PROCESS, WHICH HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE SINCE 1979. THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO MEMORIALIZE, A PROCESS THAT'S BEEN THAT'S BEEN USED SINCE IN THE CITY OF NAPLES, SINCE 1979 OR WHATEVER, JUST SO PEOPLE KNOW, LOOK, THIS IS NOT A NEW THING. IT'S NOT. I MEAN, YOU CAN'T PUT IT IN THE BALLOT QUESTION. THAT'S WHAT I MEAN.

IN THE BALLOT QUESTION YOU'RE LIMITED TO, I THINK IT'S 75 WORDS. I KNEW I KNEW 75 CHARACTERS OR SOMETHING. I'D HAVE TO WHATEVER IT IS, I KNOW IT'S A VERY SMALL. FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT. AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WASN'T DONE. I'M JUST. CAUTIONED ABOUT FOCUSING ON SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE WITHOUT REFERENDUM FOR SO LONG, AND THEN PEOPLE QUESTIONING WHY IT WASN'T DONE WITH REFERENDUM IF IT WAS REQUIRED TO BE. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BECAUSE THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN DONE THIS WAY SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN IT WAS DONE THE RIGHT WAY. NO CLARIFYING THE PROCESS. SO I THINK AMENDING THE PROCESS TOO, IN OUR CHARTER ALLOW FOR THIS WOULD MEET THE INTENT OF THE STATUTE WHICH SAYS CHARTER AMENDMENTS ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS. BUT ONE OF THE EXEMPTIONS IS UNLESS YOUR CHARTER ALLOWS IT BY ORDINANCE. SO I MEAN, YOU ARE SAYING AMENDING THE PROCESS. CORRECT.

THAT STATEMENT SUGGESTED A PROCESS DOES EXIST THAT'S BEING AMENDED. I MEAN, BUT I REALIZE YOU REALLY GOT TO READ IT TO TO TO TO FOR YOU FOR FOR A RESIDENT TO SIT THERE AND READ THAT HE'S GOT TO GO REALLY, REALLY HONE IN ON THE FACT THAT THIS IS ALREADY A PROCESS THAT'S BEING AMENDED. AND IT'S RATHER THAT BE CLEAR. THAT'S I UNDERSTAND. HAPPY TO LOOK INTO IT. YEAH, I DON'T KNOW. OKAY, APPROVE THIS NOW AND IF YOU HAVE A BETTER VERSION, THEN WE CAN IMPROVE THE SECOND BETTER VERSION. OKAY. MOTION. AND I HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT, NO PUBLIC COMMENT. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE TWO TITLED COUNCIL SECTION 2.5, SUBPARAGRAPH ONE AND 2.5, SUBPARAGRAPH TWO OF THE CITY CHARTER PERTAINING TO THE SALARY OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE CITY OF NAPLES TO GIVE THE POWER TO ADJUST THE SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL TO THE BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF NAPLES. A MOTION BY COUNCIL MEMBER BARTON. A SECOND BY COUNCIL MEMBER PENMAN. MADAM CLERK, PLEASE PULL THE COUNCIL. VICE MAYOR BLANKENSHIP. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRULL. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. BARTON. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. KRAMER. YES.

COUNCILMEMBER SCHULTZ. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. PENMAN. YES. MAYOR. YES. THANK YOU. THAT

[16.A) Second Reading of an Ordinance for the Purpose of Adopting the 2025 Level of Service Report. An Ordinance for the Purpose of Adopting The 2025 Level of Service Report; Providing for Conflicts; Severability; Correction of Scrivener’s Error; Construction; Publication; and an Effective Date.]

CONCLUDES FIVE B 15 B 15 C NOW GOING TO 16 A. WHY WE PUT YOU AT THE END OF THE DAY. I AM SO SORRY. SO SORRY. MAY I MAYOR? YES PLEASE. AN ORDINANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADOPTING THE 2025 LEVEL OF SERVICE REPORT PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT. SEVERABILITY, CORRECTION OF SCRIVENER'S ERROR, CONSTRUCTION PUBLICATION AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE. SURE. GIVE ME ONE SECOND.

[06:25:03]

MY IPAD IS NOT WORKING, SO I WILL PULL IT UP ON MY LAPTOP. I'LL SPEAK UP ABOUT THIS. THIS IS THE SECOND READING AND COUNCIL. IT WAS VOTED IN UNANIMOUSLY AT THE LAST TIME, AND IT'S ABOUT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE I. I KNOW WE HAVE NO CHOICES. STAFF IS DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO BRING UP OUR LEVEL OF SERVICES THROUGH OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS AND OUR BUDGETING. I DID DIDN'T VOTE FOR THE LEVEL OF SERVICES LAST YEAR. I DID VOTE FOR LEVEL OF SERVICES PRESENTED, KNOWING THERE'S GOOD INTENTION FOR US TO RECTIFY ALL THE ISSUES THAT I FOUND THAT NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED IN OUR LEVEL OF SERVICE. WITH THAT BEING SAID, MISS MARTIN. GOOD AFTERNOON. ERICA MARTIN, PLANNING DIRECTOR. THIS IS SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE 2025 LEVEL OF SERVICE REPORT. AS YOU KNOW, CHAPTER 48 OF YOUR CODE PROVIDES FOR THE LEVEL OF SERVICE MONITORING AND REVIEW PROCESS. WE WERE HERE BEFORE YOU IN MARCH WITH THE FIRST READING OF THE LEVEL OF SERVICE.

WE REPORTED TO YOU IN MARCH THAT THE CITY WAS SUFFICIENT WITH ALL LEVELS OF SERVICE FOR POTABLE WATER, SANITARY SEWER, SOLID WASTE, STREET TRAFFIC, PARKLANDS AND RECREATION FACILITIES, AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THE ONLY LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT THE CITY IS CURRENTLY DEFICIENT IN IS THE DRAINAGE, WHICH WE NOW REFER TO AS STORMWATER. SO CHAPTER 48 IS A VERY OLD, OUTDATED SECTION OF OUR CODE REFERS TO IT AS DRAINAGE. WE NOW REFER TO THAT AS STORMWATER.

THIS WAS PASSED ON FIRST READING. THE CODE DOES REQUIRE ON SECOND READING THAT SHOULD THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND. SHOULD WE BE DEFICIENT IN ANY OF THE ESTABLISHED LEVELS OF SERVICE? SECOND, READING IS WHERE WE BRING BACK TO YOU WHAT WE CALL THE MITIGATION OPTIONS MITIGATION STRATEGIES. SO WE ARE REPORTING TO YOU THAT WE ARE WE ACKNOWLEDGE WE ARE DEFICIENT IN DRAINAGE, STORMWATER LEVEL OF SERVICE.

BUT NOW WE ARE COMING TO YOU WITH WHAT HAVE WE DONE? WHAT ARE WE DOING, AND WHAT ARE WE PLANNING TO DO IN THE FUTURE TO ADDRESS THAT DEFICIENCY AND GET CLOSER TO MEETING THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE DEMAND? SO THE LEVELS OF SERVICE, I'M SORRY, ARE PROVIDED BOTH IN CHAPTER 48, BUT ALSO IN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO WHERE I WAS BEFORE YOU ON MONDAY WITH AN UPDATE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHERE YOU HEARD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THE LEVELS OF SERVICE AND PARTICULARLY WITH THE STORMWATER LEVEL OF SERVICE. SO AS FOR THE MITIGATION STRATEGIES, I HAVE DOCTOR JORGE HERE TODAY. HE WILL BE PRESENTING TO YOU THAT IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKET. IT'S A DOCUMENT TITLED ACTION REPORT. SO THE ACTION REPORT DOCUMENT THAT THAT YOU HAVE IS, IS ESSENTIALLY OUR MITIGATION STRATEGIES WHERE WE'LL HELP DOCTOR WILL EXPLAIN WHAT ARE WE DOING TO BECOME CLOSER TO MEETING THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE.

GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU ERICA. MY STARTING POINT IS GOING TO BE OUR VICE MAYOR, MAYOR AND OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS DID HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT POPULATION NUMBERS. SO I'M PLEASED TO REPORT YOU THAT WITH THE HELP OF OUR PROCUREMENT AND CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE IN A LIGHT SPEED, WE WERE ABLE TO BRING ONE OF THE BEST CONSULTANTS ON BOARD, AND WE WERE ABLE TO GENERATE THE REPORT THAT IS UP TO DATE. SO YOUR SECOND HEARING INCLUDES UPDATED POPULATION NUMBERS ALL THE WAY TO YEAR 20, 4045. AND IT DOES SHOW INCREASE, NOT DECREASE IN OUR SERVICE POPULATION, NOT ONLY WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF WATER AND OR SEWER DISTRICT, BUT OUTSIDE OF CITY LIMITS OF WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT SERVICE AREAS. SO I JUST DID WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE BEEN RESPONSIVE TO OUR COUNCIL'S INQUIRIES. AND WE HAVE UPDATED OUR POPULATION NUMBERS, AND WE EXTENDED THEM ALL THE WAY TO 2045 SO THAT WE ARE IN SYNC WITH OUR COMP PLAN CITY. 2045, AS WELL. AS OUR CITY MANAGER INDICATED DURING OUR WORKSHOP, WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF SYNCHRONIZING NUMBERS IN OUR COMP PLANNING.

WITH THE NUMBERS THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU AS WELL. SO THAT'S JUST THE HOUSEKEEPING

[06:30:03]

AND MAKING SURE THAT THE I DID BRING THAT TO YOUR ATTENTION. SO MOVING, MOVING FROM THERE. I THINK ERICA VERY MUCH SUMMARIZED IT VERY WELL FOR THE CYCLE OF THIS CYCLE OF LOSS AND OUR FIVE YEAR PROGRAM, WE ARE IN CONCURRENCE AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE, EXCEPT STORMWATER. WHEN IT COMES TO STORMWATER, WE HAVE INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKAGE CALLED STORMWATER ACTION PLAN. AND THAT ACTION PLAN INCLUDES NOT ONLY THINGS THAT WE ARE DOING.

WE INITIATED TO DO AND WE WILL DO. AND MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THAT PRESENTATION IS THE FUEL FOR THE ACTION ITEMS. AND THAT IS FUNDING MECHANISM AND OUR FUNDING APPROPRIATION FOR CURRENT YEAR AND FUTURE YEARS FORECAST. SO THAT IS FRANKLY, KEY POINT FOR REMEDIATION OF SHORTCOMINGS IN OUR STORMWATER UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE FOR NOW AND NEAR FUTURE AND THE FAR FUTURE. SO I THINK THAT I THINK THAT WITH THAT, I'M PLEASED TO REPORT TO YOU THAT THE PACKAGE IN FRONT OF YOU NOT ONLY HAVE ACTION ITEMS, BUT FUNDING BEHIND IT. SO WITH THAT, I'LL HAVE ALREADY AND I'LL, I'LL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

IT'S A. CAN YOU PLEASE CLARIFY THE LAST PAGE HAS THE FIVE YEAR FUNDING PLAN. THE FIVE YEAR LEVEL OF SERVICE, CFP AND FUNDING PLAN WITH VERY LARGE NUMBERS. ARE YOU FUNDING PLAN? ARE YOU SAYING FUNDING SOURCES HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED ALREADY FOR THIS LEVEL OF SERVICE? YES, I'LL HANDLE THAT PART. YES. SO AS YOU KNOW, PRIOR TO US, THE ELECTION WAS IN DECEMBER. THIS COUNCIL MADE THE DECISION TO INCREASE STORMWATER RATES BY 25% IN EACH OF THE NEXT FOUR YEARS, BEGINNING TEN ONE OF 2026. SO THAT WILL GENERATE BY THE TIME IT'S FINISHED, APPROXIMATELY $8 MILLION A YEAR. THE CURRENT BUDGET HAS $6 MILLION IN IT. FOR DESIGN, WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING THE COVE PUMP AND WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING SOME SOME SOME OTHER AREAS, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE A BASIN BY BASIN ASSESSMENT. AND THIS WILL BE PRESENTED TO YOU IN THE MAY MEETING. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE HAVE ENOUGH IN THE IN THE IN THE IMMEDIATE BASIN AREAS TO KNOW THAT WE ARE GOING TO SPEND 18 TO 30 SOME MILLION. BUT THAT'S NOT THE END OF THE STORY. WE HAVE TO DO PROJECTS IN EVERY BASIN. AND SO WHAT THIS TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION IS THOSE DESIGN DOLLARS OF WHAT WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING. AND BY THE WAY, THE C, R, A IS IS DELINEATED DOWN BELOW, WHICH WAS ALREADY DISCUSSED AT THE LAST MEETING TO INCLUDE THE RIVER PARK, THE FIRST 10TH AND 12TH, AND TO LEAVE SUGDEN FIFTH AND AND SUGDEN ON ON THE AGENDA. THAT ONE WE'RE GOING TO BE SEEKING OUTSIDE GRANTS. THE OTHER ONES ARE FRAMED TO BE WITHIN THE CRA. SO THIS WHERE YOU GET TO THE 50 MILLION. THAT PRESUPPOSES WE'RE GOING TO BE IN POSITION TO HAVE THE COMPLETE DESIGN DONE. THESE THINGS CAN SHIFT. BUT I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT WHEN WE'RE RAISING REVENUES, BY THE TIME THE FOUR YEAR PERIOD IS OVER OF $8 MILLION A YEAR, WE'RE GOING TO KEEP TRYING TO LEVERAGE THEM AGAINST FEDERAL AND STATE DOLLARS, BUT WE WILL BE IN POSITION TO HAVE THE BANDWIDTH TO FINANCE THE PROJECT, SHOULD THAT BE THE NEED AND OUR ABILITY. SO THAT IS WHY WE WE WOULD BE REMISS TO SHOW YOU WE'RE GOING TO SPEND $10 MILLION IN DESIGN OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS AND NO CONSTRUCTION.