Loading...
DSAC Minutes 06/05/2002 R June 5, 2002 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE COUNCIL Naples, Florida, June 5, 2002 DSAC Members: .Staff Members: Marco A. Espinar Brian E. Jones Justin Martin Thomas Masters Bryan Milk Thomas Peek Herbert Savage Peter Van Arsdale Patrick G. White, Asst. City Atty. Susan Murray, Planning Phil Tindall, OFM Tom Kuck, County-Engr. Ed Perico, Bldg. Dept Joseph IC Schmitt Maria Ramsey, P&R James Fitzek Parks & Rec. Ed Riley, FCD Page 1 Public: Bob Thinnes Ken Cuyler Jeremy Giles June 5, 2002 -Bonita Bay Group 3461 Bonita Bay Blvd. Bonita Springs 390-1124 -Goodlette, Coleman & Johnson 435-3535 -CBIA Enterprise Ave 436-6100 Page 2 II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. June 5, 2002 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Roll Call Approval of Agenda Approval of Meeting Minutes Old Business a. Heights of buildings b. Farm Market Overlay c. Four other topics New Business a. Rates and fees for EDU Growth Management Update Subcommittee Report Council Member Comments Public Comments Adjournment Old Business AGENDA June 5, 2002 Ae When the tape began at 3:50 p.m., the committee was talking about the height of new buildings. There was a discussion on the cost of the land and therefore the growing upward towards the sky instead of the property widthwise. There was talk on the 'wedding cake' homes on Park Shore and U.S. 41. But chairperson is saying it's not the design but the height, the mass, and the distance between the buildings that needs to be in consideration. Mr. Savage then made a comment referring that all things--people, animals, trees, and buildings--come in all shapes and sizes, and variety is needed. The motion was then carried with one opposition. The reason for the opposition was that the member has been involved with design components. In some cases, land is used to the Page 3 XII. June 5, 2002 regardless of impact on neighborhood. It is suited better with more flexibility, and is a case-by-case basis on the limits of land desired. The rebuttal was that the land cost so much and needs reasonable profit return and not hurting environment. B. Next was the discussion on the farm market overlay. A handout, with a private amendment stated, to allow petroleum bulk stations in terminals to distribute to farmers for wholesale use. A meeting was conducted prior to today about this topic on what kind of permits would be required and what types of supervision and other criteria would be necessary. The first question was, "Would the tanks be above or below the ground?" They would be above the ground and they would meet all petroleum codes. Also, is contamination of the ground surrounding be possible? No, because there would be all proper permits and fire codes followed, and the site would be looked at by the EPA. And in determining if there was a leak, one would be able to tell by the color. The farm diesel is red and the regular is clear. How big is the area? The area is about two blocks long and would serve the farmers of Immokalee so they could refuel their equipments and trucks easily. The area is not large, and the bulk station will remain smaller as not to grow into a huge distributor, but as a local service. Other talk lead to discussion of wording in packets (previously handed out from 3/27) and that led to an amicable closure. There will be future investigation and more info will be collected. In closing, all members were in favor of plan, and the motion was carried. C. Quickly, the same speaker, Susan, dealt with four other topics. One, a summary sheet, which was self-explanatory, would extend the moratorium until the issues were legally effective. All in favor and motion was carried. Second, Section 2.1345 had an advertising error and a rewrite of the existing ordinance would be made to more easily understand the article. The ordinance will remain in effect until the issue is redeveloped in July. No motion necessary. Third was the issue on the PUD sun setting option. The Board County Commissioners, with respect to the PUD including the older ones in effect, had a meeting. The proposed amendment option was to rezone or to grant an extension to any PUD that had trouble developing moratorium. One simple change made was to strike to a three-year sunset provision therefore lessening the strength of option. Is this provision encouraging more growth because can now get extensions before a board? This will be discussed further, but for now was voted all in favor and motion was carried. Lastly, was an issue to require Collier County write-away permits at the time of STP approval as opposed to time of building permit. This meaning one can obtain prior to or at the time of approval. All in favor and motion was carried. (On a side note, the first unveiling to the planning commission of the moratorium and the concurrency presentation by Norm Peter will be tomorrow, June 6th. ) New Business Phil Tindall, a county coordinator, gave a summary of the consultant report and the first draft of recommended rated for June 25th. Including the effective date of rates as September 1 st. Dunkin and Associates, a land development planning consulting firm, from Austin, Texas, will work with this project; the first time in Collier County, but not Southwest Florida. In March of 1999, Emerson, Young and Company did a report on the fees and old rates, and based these numbers on all the residential construction (homes). Instead of using people per home the basis is now on the size of the home, mostly single family Page 4 June 5, 2002 XIII. XIV. XV. homes and multiple family homes. The new formula uses an EDU, or Equivalent Dwelling Unit. The current fees will also now include hotels and motels, and the hopes are for these dwelling to not increase revenue receipts but spread burden to all occupied units. In a paragraph, the purpose of calculation of the rate schedule is not to anticipate a future level of service, to determine what the rates are, but to maintain the current level of service based on replacement cost of existing park and recreation inventory. From compiled census data, permit data, and real estate data these numbers have been calculated: one (1) EDU is equal to one (1) typical single family home; which is 2.73 bedrooms in a single family home. (That is the average size in the county). Basically, the intent is to maintain the current level of service. The current inventory replacement costs are as follows: $748 for EDU parks and $746 for EDU regional parks. The members were asked to motion, but the discussion kept going. Nobody was satisfied with this new topic. It seemed unfair and the numbers did not seem to be benefiting homeowners. It was as ifa medium (3500) square footage home would be the same fees for a little larger (5000) square foot home. The committee was not sure of this topic and when asked to motion, the issue was opposed in a 5 to 4 vote. Further investigations, including more accurate numbers, would be necessary. Growth Management Update Subcommittee Reports The utility subcommittee report was passed out at the meeting, and the other committees to meet at further dates. Council Member Comments XVI. XVII. Public CommentsmNONE Adjournment Motion was made to adjourn- Time: 5:15 p.m. Page 5