Loading...
DSAC Minutes 02/05/2003 RFebruary 5, 2003 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, February 5, 2003 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3:30 PM in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Peter Van Arsdale Charles Abbott Dalas Disney Marco Espinar (3:44) Blair Foley Brian Jones Robert Mulhere Thomas Masters Brian Milk Thomas Peek Herbert Savage (3:40) Dino Logo (Excused) Justin Martin (Excused) ALSO PRESENT: Jennifer Moser, GIS/CDES Barry Axelred, GIS/IT Ed Perico Tom Kuck, Engr. Dir. Ed Riley, FCO Susan Murray, Planning Margaret Wrestle, Planning Tom Wides, Public Utilities Patrick White, Assistant County Attorney Denny Baker, Joe Schmitt, Dev. Services & Environmental Dept. 1 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA February 5, 2003 3:30 p.m. I. Approval of Agenda- Minutes-January 8th, Meeting II. Staff Announcements A. Development Services Update B. Transportation Division Update C. Public Utilities Division Update III. Old Business A. Tom Masters 12/31/02 Letter (Peter Van Arsdale) V. Subcommittee Reports A. Land Development Regulation (Justin Martin) B. Construction Code (Dino Longo) C. Utility Code (Tom Masters) D. Ad Hoc Committee on Fees VI. New Business A. Spring 2003 LDC Schedule - Susan Murray B. GIS Financial Review (Barry Axelrod) C. GIS Plans for CDES (Jennifer Moser) D. Discussion of LDC 2.4.5.2 landscaping required in interior of vehicular use areas as it pertains to parking garages (Peter Van Arsdale) VII. Committee Member Comments February5,2003 II. Chairman Peter Van Arsdale called the meeting to order at 3:33 PM. Approval of Agenda-Minutes-January 8th, Meeting Thomas Peek moved to approve the Agenda and Minutes of the January 8th meeting. Seconded by Dalas Disney. Carried unanimously 9-0. Staff Announcements A. Development Services Update - later. B. Transportation Division Update - Peter asked Anna to ask Transportation how long it takes them to do the reviews that affect construction. What their standards are for plan review and permit approval, STP's etc. C. Public Utilities Division - Tom Wildes At the last meeting the impact fees were introduced that are being addressed by Public Utilities. $120 for ERC decrease for water, and approx. $110.00 increase for waste water. January 21st they met with the DSAC Subcommittee and made a presentation to them. February 18th -- 9:00AM will be a workshop with the Board addressing the Master Plans, the impact fees and the rate study review. They will look for approval for the impact fees and the rate studies on February 25th Board meeting. They are looking to implement the impact fees on April 1st, 2003. That is their recommendation to the Board. III. IV. IV. Old Business A. Tom Masters 12/31/02 Letter (Peter Van Arsdale) Tom stated he wrote the letter because the Board members didn't seem to understand what was going on at this level and how we can get back to the one stop permitting. Subcommittee Reports A. Land Development Regulation (Justin Martin) - no meeting B. Construction Code (Dino Logo) -no meeting C. Utility Code (Tom Masters) - still working on the new guidelines for the permits and trying to replace sections of the Utility Code. D. Ad Hoc Committee on Fees - no meeting New Business A. Spring 2003 LDC Schedule - Susan Murray - she handed out the spring schedule for cycle (I) for 2003 and two draft schedules for a Special Cycle and Cycle II. She covered the dates and times. A recommendation for 2:00 PM for the March 19th meeting was made and Susan will adjust that time. Susan mentioned Diane Flagg from Sidewalk & Pathways is generating some Amendments and some are staff generated when working through issues that need clarification or changes to the Code. Also contemplating changes to the Architectural and Design standards which was Board directed. They have had workshops on Landscaping issues in which they directed staff to bring forth changes. 2 February 5, 2003 B. GIS Financial Review ( Barry Axelrod) Barry gave a short presentation: - 2 year project - they are in the second year of the project fight now. Details CDES -Fund 112 and 113 Details. Hardware, software, and the services expenses were displayed. Numbers with line items were shown on the slide presentation. He covered particular items. They will need two data elements in which, until they are cleaned up where they are useful in the GIS, it has put them back a bit. But they are still within the two year plan. He feels they are within Budget. Ce GIS Plans for CDES (Jennifer Moser) Jennifer gave examples of a live demonstration. She displayed the different options that can be used. Discussion and questions were asked of Jennifer by the committee members, such as: sharing and collecting information, FEMA, wetlands, how accurate the information will be, and security. Future of GIS in CDES - it is on the Internet now and can be used with minimal use. -Public Access - pre-determine permit restrictions -Integrated GIS functionality in CD plus replacement -Digital Plan review - will make permit process more efficient They are concerned about the stability of the product, it is improving but they are not staffed yet finding reliable persons to maintain the system. Issues need to be resolved with some details that need to be addressed. Barry did not feel comfortable giving an exact date for it to be 100% ready. Summarization: The capitol project is doing what it is set out to do - putting in place people- infrastructure - struggling through process to produce the data & services wanted - slower than hoped and are hiring and staying within budget. Jennifer will take suggestions for data submitted. Mr. Van Arsdale asked Barry to give them regular updates when changes occur. Barry will provide the committee members with a questionnaire for input with their priorities. He will collect them at the next meeting. Joe $chmitt arrived and gave the Development Services Update - he stated they will be going to the Board for their increase in the Construction Evaluation Tables the first week of March with an implementation date of April 1, 2003. Included will be fee increases in the Planning and Engineering processes. Income is not coming in as fast as expected and he has to raise fees. He has briefed most of the Commissioners in understanding the use of the 113 Funds and other different projects. A service is being paid for and it isn't being provided because it is being used to do other things in February 5, 2003 the County and support the County staff. Joe stated he works for the citizens of Collier County, but provides services to those paying permit fees also. Actions have been taken with a freeze on all new hires under Fund 113. Discretionary expenses will be looked at closely. He will probably end up the year with approx. $2.5 surplus and some already tagged for capital expenditures. If they continue at the current rate without raising fees, he will be in the deficit. There is a significant downturn. The quantity of permits has gone down, but more of a significant decrease in income, which means there are smaller projects and a lot less, permit income. (Development Services fees-Permitting and Planning Services). He has noticed it since October, contributing it to the economy and impact fees that went into effect. They are taking measures to deal with it and projecting expenses and income. Mr. Van Arsdale asked Joe about Tom Masters' letter discussed earlier in the meeting and what can be done to deal with issues that are expensive, inefficient or time consuming such as an STP process. The process is so cumbersome and convoluted to enforce the zoning and building codes. How can they, as a group, (DSAC) deal with the situation? He doesn't feel they should have to write the Commissioners and it is their job to serve their customers. Joe responded he is in the process of answering Tom's letter. He asked staff for their input and probably find fault on both sides. He realizes a lot of frustration concerns come from transportation. Discussion followed on the process and providing government services to Collier County. Joe needs dollars to provide these missions. He also needs the Committees constructive input. A possible workshop could be held with the Committee or a sub- committee to sit down and discuss the concerns and how to improve the process. He is using too much of his resources servicing product without very little output. If it is attacking the Land Development Code, then that needs to be done. He is restricted by the Code that everyone collectively developed. Brian Milk feels there are enough resources to fix the problems. Someone has to have ownership and respect that ownership to give the person the confidence to follow through. Instead of a process needing multiple copies of something when only a few are needed needs to be told to somebody. The system has worked for a quite a few years, then there were some political and power struggles, and the ownership left. Somehow the process got taken away from Planning Services. He feels the process should be back in Planning Services, not Transportation or anywhere else in order to work better. Joe discussed how complex the system is now. He has put his foot down on having things scheduled without having it properly staffed. He can't stand in front of the Planning Commission with an inadequate review. The days as the Brian discussed are gone. Concurrency and other type o£things are not in the Development Services 4 February 5, 2003 Building any more. Many want to fight the issues because they do not agree with the answers that come from Transportation. After much discussion it was decided to hold a workshop with specific topics and identify the issues of concern. It was suggested to have Transportation under Engineering, but Joe stated it would not happen. Concurrency management has forced more of a validation process. It could work, but another administrator would have to relinquish his position. Mr. Mulhere stated it was always fought to remove Transportation out of Development Services, but when Mr. Feder came in with a critical road building and transportation component, he asked and received the ability to take it out of the Division. Mr. Mulhere has projects that have been in the system for more then a year and do not have the transportation reviews. To him the answer is standardize review times that are published and held to. Mr. Abbott is shocked at the ineptitude of the County staff. Joe felt they should attack the project and not the person. The staffs are professionals and have to live within the confines of the Land Development Code. Mr. Foley left at 4:47 PM. Mr. Disney stated a lot of his work is going away because of the process, part of it may be due to the economy but a big part is they are not working in Collier County any longer due to the fact that it cost too much to do business. Anything he can do to assist the process, he will gladly do. Joe will discuss this with the three Administrators and Directors involved and put a workshop together as soon as he can. Discussion followed on the Transportation issues and issues to discuss at the workshop. D. Discussion of LDC 2.4.5.2 landscaping required in interior of vehicular use areas as it pertains to parking garages (Peter Van Arsdale) Mr. VanArsdale has understood they are requiring the upper decks of parking garages to have the same level of Landscaping as a surface based parking lot. Margaret Wuerstle stated there is an Amendment that will state what Mr. Van Arsdale is saying. It deals with vehicular use areas. There are a lot of areas within the LDC that could be fixed and streamlined. VII. Committee Member Comments - None 5 February 5, 2003 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the chair at 5:12 PM. COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Chairman, Peter Van Arsdale 6