April 08, 2024

Ms. Jessica Kluttz

Davidson Engineering
4365 Radio RD, Unit 201
Naples, FL. 34104

RE: CU-PL20230012599 - Naples Excavating

Ms. Kluttz,

The following comments are provided to you regarding the above referenced project. If you have
questions, please contact the appropriate staff member who conducted the review. The project
will retain a "HOLD" status until all comments are satisfied.

The following comments need to be addressed as noted:

Rejected Review: Comprehensive Planning Review
Reviewed By: Jessica Malloy
Email: [email protected] Phone #: (239) 252-2373

Correction Comment 1:
The site exists within the City of Naples Coastal Ridge Wellfield. Please revise the narrative to
demonstrate consistency with all applicable policies, specifically Policies 3.1.4.2.a. through j. and
3.1.4.3. of the Conservation and Coastal Management Element (CCME) of the Growth
Management Plan.

Rejected Review: Landscape Review

Reviewed By: Mark Templeton
Email: [email protected] Phone #: (239) 252-2475

Correction Comment 1:
Type C buffers require 2 rows of staggered trees. The concept plan only shows 10' of the 20'
buffer along the West unencumbered by the maintenance easement. This will likely result in 1 of
the 2 rows of trees in the maintenance easement. Please revise as necessary so that the buffer
plantings can be located outside of the maintenance and drainage easements.

Rev. 2: Since the plans don't show adequate LBE outside of the maintenance easement for the
plantings, a letter of agreement for the plantings will be required. The recorded drainage easement
document indicates that this easement was granted to Collier County. You will need to reach out
to Beth Johnsson at Collier County Stormwater Planning. If they are not able to provide
authorization, the plantings will need to be removed from the easement and the SIP landscape
plans will need to be revised accordingly and included in the next submittal for that PL#. Since
this is an SIP the requirements just need to be met to the greatest extent practical.

Rejected Review: Zoning Review

Reviewed By: Eric Ortman
Email: [email protected] Phone #: (239) 252-1032
Rev 3 – General Comment 1 -
Per Mike Bosi, any deviations sought though a LDBPA require a separate variance petition.

Rev 3 – General Comment 2 -

If approved, the CU will be conditioned on obtaining all required permits.

Rev 3 – General Comment 3 - Res. 08-373 and 1995 zoning reference

Res. 08-73 involves an industrial zoned property that is surrounded on all four sides by other
industrial properties, whereas the current petition abuts a residential use on its western side. This
is not a comparison of two equal properties. The reference to 1995 does not include the
magnitude of change that has occurred in the County in the last 30 years and that what was
appropriate then may no longer be appropriate. Too, the proposed is not a permitted use but a
conditional use.

Rev 3 – General Comment 4 – Noise Ordinance – While principal planners do not have the
authority to interpret the code, the proposed use is similar enough to construction activities that it
will likely be subject to various sections of the Noise Ordinance some of which are listed below.
This sections may impact the hours of operation of the proposed use.

§54-87.A which exempts permitted construction operations from the noise ordinance provided
that “all equipment is operated in accord with the manufacturers' specifications and with all
standard equipment, manufacturers' mufflers and noise reducing equipment in use and in proper
operating condition.”

§ Sec 54-92.f.2 Construction Sounds

a. Any construction activities and site preparation activities including but not limited to land
clearing and grading, excavation, and vegetation removal, authorized or permitted pursuant to the
provisions of this Code shall occur only during the following hours: 6:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.,
Monday through Saturday. No construction activity or site preparation activity is permitted on
Sundays or on the following holidays: New Year's Day, Memorial Day, Fourth of July, Labor
Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day.

§ Sec. 54-93. - Noise violations that do not require use of testing equipment
C. Taking into account the time of day, day of the week, and the unmeasured Ambient Noise at
the noise affected site, the following Noises are a violation of this Ordinance without use of
testing equipment provided such Noise, based upon observation by listening by an enforcement
officer and a complainant at the noise affected site, is clearly:
1) Unreasonably loud, raucous or jarring: (is clearly annoying or clearly disturbing to any
individual of normal sensibilities at such site); or
(2) A nuisance: (without reasonable justification is unreasonably interfering with the peace and
quiet of any individual of normal sensibilities at such site).
The proposed use will likely not be eligible for the following exemption which will likely impact
hours of operation.

§ Sec 54-87 M. Exception for existing operations. An exception to the Sound Level limits
contained in Section Six, Table I, shall be permitted where a commercial use or other non-
residential use had in prior years established its place of business in an area away from a
residential use, and through subsequent development or rezoning, now finds itself adjoining a
Residential Zone. In these instances, the Sound Level limits in Table I pertaining to the
previously existing zoning or use category shall apply, and the commercial use or other
nonresidential use shall not be required to meet those Sound Level limits pertaining to residential
zoning or use.
Review 3 Correction Comment 1 – Concept Plan
The concept plan shows a refuse pile with a 100-foot diameter at the bottom. Will the
construction debris and yard debris be kept in separate piles? How high will each pile be? The
piles cannot exceed the 50-foot maximum allowed height for a structure in the I zone. How long
will the debris piles remain? How will odors emanating from the piles, particularly yard debris,
be managed? Height may become another issue of compatibility.

Review 3 Correction Comment 2 – Concept Plan

Debris piles are not allowed within the setback. Please adjust concept plan accordingly.

Rev 3 – Correction Comment 3 – Wall Requirement – Concept Plan

Proposed use is a conditional use. 5.03.02.H requires a wall between industrial and residential
property but a fence with plantings is being proposed.

Review 3 Correction Comment 4 – Inputs to Proposed Recycling Business

Without explicit details on what the inputs are going to be, several departments, including zoning,
pollution control, and environmental review, are not going to able to recommend approval of this
project. Reservations are broadly focused on the four issues below.

Concrete – How will concrete be recycled? Will it involve crushing it into smaller pieces? How is
any rebar or metal meshing to be separated from the concrete?

Toxic/Hazardous Materials/Waste – Construction debris will often include materials/fluids in

varying quantities and degrees of toxicity or levels of toxicity. Will the debris include appliances,
air handlers, or other fluids such as paint that are often kept in a house and may or may not be
removed prior to demolition? How will any toxic materials be separated from the waste stream
and be safely and appropriately disposed of to protect public health and safety and the safety of
the groundwater/wellfields?

Yard Debris – The application seems to have two types of yard debris. The County considers yard
debris to be a byproduct of landscaping and/or land clearing containing only organic material.
Ancillary soil/dirt/rock resulting from machinery scraping the ground in the process of collecting
construction debris is considered construction debris. Staff needs to know the quantity of yard
debris, using the above general definition, and if any other material is proposed to be included
with the yard debris.

Construction Debris – Will the construction debris be from sources other than residential
buildings such as commercial or industrial buildings? Will hazardous materials, including freon
or freon replacement in air handlers, paints etc. left behind by the last homeowner be removed
prior to demolition. If the buildings are commercial or industrial buildings what steps will be
taken to remove toxic/hazardous materials/waste prior to demolition?

Review 3 Correction Comment 5 – Noise, glare, and odors

The response that mitigating factors are built into the machine is inadequate. No data or noise
analysis has been provided on the decibel output of the machine throughout its range of functions.
Please provide such data on the decibel levels of the proposed machine throughout its full range
of functions. Depending on the levels, a sound study may be needed to demonstrate the degree of
noise diminution as ones gets farther away from the machine. Please provide data on how much
dust is captured by the machine and how much dust is released into the surrounding air.

The work performed under SICs 1611-1629 and 1795 is performed off site with the industrial
siting being for a yard and offices. Manufacturing of SIC in the 3200s and 3900s occurs indoors
where sound can be mitigated. The proposed use is to be outdoors.
How are the odors generated by the refuse pile(s) going to be dealt with so that they do not
become a nuisance to abutting property owners. The location of the machine will place it 200 feet
from the closest home. Regarding noise, smell and visibility, how with the use be compatible with
the abutting residential properties?

Using the proposed hours and the midpoint of the number of trucks, a new truck will arrive every
nine minutes. How much noise will these trucks generate considering engine noise, back up
alarms, and depending on truck type the banging of the trucks’ rear gates against the truck’s body.

Rev 3 – Correction Comment 6

How many pieces of equipment will be operating at one time exclusive of the separating machine
and trucks delivering debris?

Rejected Review: County Attorney Review

Reviewed By: Derek Perry
Email: [email protected] Phone #: (239) 252-8066

Correction Comment 1:
Miscellaneous Corrections: At the request of Zoning this submittal is in reject status consistent
the Email dated 10-26-2023 from Eric Ortman at GMD.

REV2: Please continue to work with assigned planner Eric Ortman to assemble a sufficient
application submittal. Substantive CAO review to commence at subsequent submittal.

REV3: Per staff discussion; please continue to work with assigned planner Eric Ortman and
Development Review staff to assemble a sufficient application submittal. Substantive CAO
review to commence at subsequent submittal.

GENERAL COMMENTS: [Eric Ortman]

1. Please be advised that pursuant to the LDC, a petition can be considered closed if there has
been no activity on the petition for a period of six (6) months. In addition, a GMP Amendment
application that is a companion item can likewise be considered closed. That six months period
will be calculated from the date of this letter.
2. Additional comments or stipulations may be forthcoming once a sufficient petition has been
submitted for review. This correspondence should not be construed as a position of support or
non-support for any issues within the petition. Staff will analyze the petition and the
recommendation will be contained in the staff report prepared for the Collier County Planning
Commission (CCPC) or Hearing Examiner (HEX).

3. Please ensure that all members of your team that may testify before the HEX or CCPC and the
Board of County Commissioners (BCC) are registered as lobbyists with the County pursuant
to the regulations regarding that issue.
4. When addressing review comments, please provide a cover letter outlining your response to
each comment. Include a response to all comments.
5. Please put revised dates on all exhibits and in the title block of all Plans. The PUD document
should include a footer that reflects the project name, petition number, date and page X of Y
for the entire document. Documents without this information will be rejected.
6. A partial resubmittal cannot be accepted; please do not resubmit until you can respond to ALL
 review comments.
7. Public hearings cannot be held until the Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) criteria has
been met. In some petition types a NIM must be held while other petition types only require
the agent to send a letter. All letters and newspaper ads must be pre-approved by the county
planner. For additional information about the process please contact me. Please note that the
NIM must be held at least 15 days prior to the first hearing. As you prepare for that meeting,
please be aware of the following items:
a) Please provide the required NIM notice affidavit and its attachments prior to the meeting
(in compliance with the LDC); and
b) Please post signs to direct attendees to the exact meeting location; and
c) Please ensure that there is sound amplification equipment available and working for this
meeting. If there is no permanent equipment, please bring a tested/working portable
microphone; and
d) You must provide a written synopsis of the meeting that includes a list of all questions and
answers as well as providing the audio/video tape; and
e) Please prepare documents for hand out to all NIM attendees and the public hearing file,
that show the differences in the uses that would be allowed in the existing and proposed
zoning districts. This request is based upon recent CCPC direction.
8. Pursuant to F.S. 125.022, exhibits and application materials are subject to review upon each
resubmittal until deemed sufficient and complete. Should the project receive a third request
for additional information, staff requests that the applicant provide written acknowledgement
with the resubmittal to waive the regulation that restricts the County from requesting additional
information. Projects that do not include such written acknowledgement and that fail to address
any outstanding review items with the 4th submittal will be denied/recommended for denial.
9. Note the adopted fee schedule requires payment of additional fees for petition review upon the
5th and subsequent submittals; please contact the appropriate staff and resolve issues to avoid
this fee.
10. If you would like to discuss the review comments, require clarification and/or wish to identify
agree-to-disagree issues, a post-review meeting can be arranged including all rejecting
reviewers. To schedule a post-review meeting, please contact me, and Zoning Operations staff
will proceed with scheduling.

Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) Documents

Hosting a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM) is required for this application type. To
resolve this condition, please upload all supporting NIM documents from meeting to the GMD
Public Portal. Contact Planner of this project for additional questions. If you experience issues
uploading, please contact Client Services at (239) 252- 1036.

If you have any questions, please contact me at (239) 252-1032 or

[email protected].

Respectfully,

Eric Ortman, Principal Planner

Growth Management Department