Loading...
CCPC Minutes 05/01/2003 SMay 1, 2003 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida, May 1, 2003 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Planning Commission in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 8:30 AM in SPECIAL SESSION in Building "F of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Kenneth Abernathy Mark Strain Dwight Richardson Lora Jean Young Lindy Adelstein Brad Schiffer Paul Midney Russell Budd-Absent (Excused) David Wolfley-Absent (Excused) ALSO PRESENT: Joe Schmitt, Community Dev. & Environmental Services Ray Bellows, Planning Services Marjorie Student, Assistant County Attorney Stan Litsinger, Planning Services Continuation of the LDC Amendment Meetin~ of Aoril 30, 2003 Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Roll Call was taken - a Quorum was established with Mr. Budd and Mr. Wolfley not in attendance. Nancy Linnan - County's outside Growth Management Council Mr. Strain addressed and asked the following: - Page 35 - Section E -lC - asked about the Master Plan and WRA's. Nancy will check to make sure it is in compliance. - Page 39 & 40 - make the word "sufficient" throughout the paragraph. - Page 36 - make "complete & sufficient" consistent. - Page 37-F1 A - talks about Public Hearing before the EAC - forms of public notice - may need to be stipulated - Nancy thought there was no required notice but will make sure. - Paragraph below - legal description "sketch & survey" - page 23 - refers to "map or sketch" will make consistent. Paragraph "C" - same thing - needs consistency. - Page 39 - C4 - Changes in the Design Criteria etc. - he asked about the SSA needs or the SRA areas - Nancy will change the language so it is clear. - Page 40-2I - Typical cross sections - he addressed if it was asking for deviations to the LDC - applied again or what? They can address it later when it talks about deviations to the LDC. - Page 41 - H9 - Overall acreage of gross density - Nancy stated the overall acreage is the gross acreage- real acreage. - Page 42 - J - 4th line up from bottom - Residential Units in an SRA - answered. - Page 44 - D2 - talks about Buffer around West Side of the Camp Key Strand - he asked why only the West side? Nancy stated it was the agreement of the Wildlife Federation and the Eastern Land owners. Next paragraph - storm water - earthmining - is wrong site and will be corrected. - Page 44 - Par C - top - needs to be defined better. - Page 45 - #7 - Infrastructure requirements - ref 3.15 of the LDC - this is being rewritten at the present time. Item C - Water & Sewer - will County take over systems eventually? Nancy did not know-no decision yet. Mark felt the language should be as tight as it can be for future decisions. Item D - Septic Systems - mean town being fed off a water supply when supposed to have centralized water and sewer? Yes - want edge effect. (100 acres of any town) Mark didn't think it sounded like a compact rural development. - Page 46 - K1-B - Transportation Impact Assessment- talked about public transportation and wanted to know who defines "applicable"....Nancy responded "County does". -Page 47- 6A2 - Storm water flow patterns across the site - he asked if it would be more useful to have the existing and historic storm water low pattern, so if trying to restore or make better, they can be mimicked as close as possible? Nancy said "yes". - Page 48- if WRA is located between two developments, which one benefits from the WRA? Nancy responded the first one that claims it - they only get to claim it once. Project B - use for capacity - response "yes". - Page 49-3-Special Assessments - 3rd line - government reference, the landowner will accede to a special assessment on his property - he asked if the landowner would be a Community Development District? Nancy said "yes". Nancy responded on comments made the day before. - Citation on Page 44 - is correct. - Issue rose about the numbers. She stated when meeting with the Environmental Community and Commissioner Strain, he had prepared a chart showing the worse possible case of how any credits could be generated and what it means in acreage. She studied it, and felt it was a good set of assumptions on a worse case basis. She stated nobody anticipates those numbers, but in discussions of need and numbers, the agency wasn't worded about it in the end. They determined, on behalf of the County and the State, and mainly within the parameters of the Growth Management Act, why they did not think it was a concern. First the numbers increased drastically even after submitting the data and analysis. (Increase in acreage and population) She talked about the FL Wildlife Federation Restoration credits - official map and the Departments insistence. It all looked great on paper - but they were concerned it wouldn't work. Five or ten year timeframe may not work. (5 & 7 year check) Department insisted to provide for the early entry bonus for someone coming in for first 5 years and do the HSA's and the flow-way stewardship areas. Early incentive bonuses were not available for the water retention areas. Credits would increase drastically. The Eastern Lands had gone through a data process, and because of it, given the data and analysis, assuming all the credits were used; the areas of natural resources would be protected. They have protected the stuff they wanted to protect. There are going to be compact areas. Assuming Mr. Strain's numbers are correct, the reaction was, instead of putting all the growth on 10 or 15% of the property, it is on 31% of the property limiting the growth to a hugh population influx. Mr. Strain explained how he got his figures. With how much land is developed was a big impact on how they were reviewed. When he realized the bonuses and other things had not been factored into the 16,000, he thought it would be wise to see what kind of an impact it would have. His analysis was attached and a copy given to each Commissioner. Mr. Richardson talked about the worse case scenario in doubling the size of Collier County and wondered if they should look at this in 5 years. Nancy stated not much would be happening nor have an impact within the 5 year period. But she stated the Commissioners can always ask staff for information or an update at anytime. Mr. Richardson said they need to think about caps and good planning projections. Has to be balanced out on terms of the total impact. Nancy said legislature is very detailed and question whether they can add additional stoppers. They split it up because they thought this was the easy part - putting in place the process. They thought the hard part would be the design guidelines. Mr. Richardson is looking at density and neutrality. Stan Litsinger responded they are looking at a possible Collier County fiscal impact analysis model that would be customized relative to the impact and demonstrate the neutrality. Mr. Richardson is concerned about letting it grow out of bounds. The Comprehensive Plan can be amended at anytime twice a year. Discussion followed on getting the information at anytime and changing the rules if needed. If better connections are needed the LDC Amendments can also be changed and something added. Mr. Midney was concerned about the potential 300,000 population. He spoke of the zoning of 40,000 five acre tracts. If 300,000 people in the area and take up 50,000 acres of land, it will have a major impact on habitat and agriculture. He can see how the plan covers conservation of the natural areas, but not how it discourages premature conversion of agricultural land to dwellings. There is no point system such as; where a production of an orange grove - where is the incentive to keep it in agriculture. Nancy said it is because they are limiting the growth to certain areas and forms of development - taking the potential areas of growth out of the most sensitive areas. There will be open land and would probably remain in agriculture. Mr. Midney feels they could have had incentives for it. Discussion followed on prime agricultural land and agri-business. Mr. Midney stated 80% of the people in Immokalee work on farms and they depend on them. They will be impacted the most if agriculture is squeezed out. Nancy stated most of the persons on the Task Force were from the Immokalee area. Marti Chumbler spoke of the Stewardship Credit worksheet. Mr. Midney said there is a "slight" incentive to keep some of it in agriculture. He talked about the Immokalee area being poor and about 80% Hispanic and black. He said with fanning being not as profitable, they now want to develop towns outside of Immokalee. It has only grown 1% a year. They could become more segregated than they are now. It could shrivel up if the economic base is gone. Impact on Ag, sprawl, sewer, and water quality were discussed. Nancy suggested waiting and seeing how the system works before making any changes. She stated these 4 questions can't be raised within the context of the Land Development Code proposed Amendments. The Ava Maria University was discussed using up conservation credits, open space and density. They will not use conservation credits. More discussion followed on the usage of the land. - Page 48 -ground water impact statement was removed- he questioned why it was deleted - Nancy responded they went back to the language and determined ground water was not in the list - it is not a facility impact. It is included in other areas. A lengthy discussion followed between Mr. Midney and Nancy on the South Florida Water Management District measuring hydro periods, water quality and maintaining the natural balance of wetlands. SPEAKERS Nicole Ryan - Conservancy of SWFL - The Conservancy had sent an e-mail with concerns on April 9th on the first draft of the Amendments and since then many of their concerns have been addressed. Some of the issues and concerns were as follows: - A review at the end of 5 years - will that be soon enough and could it be reviewed earlier. - Nothing in the LDC Amendments allows County staff to look at the SRA's on anything besides an SRA by SRA basis. When a new SRA is proposed the County may look to see how they are planned in conjunction with each other, but not explicit in the plan. - Would sprawl be created? - The population at build out. It would have been helpful to have numbers when the GMP's went through. - Transportation - how will the SRA's affect it? Worse case scenario build out will be stress on the roads in the rural lands. What kind of highways and road systems are going to be built? Will they be appropriate? - April 28th draft - definitions on page 3 - ancillary use for a University - not specific enough. Page 8 & 10 - definition for drilling - working on different language. Page 45 - deviations from the LDC - isn't comfortable with language in draft & will work on different language. Mrs. Young also agreed the need for an update before the 5 years. Nancy mentioned they can ask staff what is out there cumulatively. Mrs. Young also suggested the speakers not use the acronyms and is more communicative to use the descriptive. Brad Cornell - Collier County Audubon Society - they are supportive of the policies in the Growth Management Plan and the concept growth should protect the final resources identified on the maps. They are providing and gathering comments for the benefit for the next draft. Restoration areas around the Camp Key Strand and the Callaway Slue are there because of protecting the wetlands in the flowways and needed to be incentives for protecting uplands. Restore agricultural fields to viable habitat for wide range species like panthers and bears. They will offer more comments and are supportive. Nancy Peyton - FL Wildlife Federation - they are working on some issues with County staff and assured they will be worked out. Some of the comments are as follows: Mr. Strains chart is the best case scenario - protection of all the habitat stewardship areas, the flow way stewardship areas and the other sending lands including the restoration lands. Restoration lands - appear on map because of negotiations with landowners. (Improves the corridors) Providing incentives for farm lands to be restored helped facilitate wildlife movement. - Caution not to encumber the process for designating Sending Lands. - Supports section in LDC to allow the County acquire and retire Stewardship credits. (Controls growth) - West side of Camp Key Strand - want to enhance it - better to widen it on one side for restoration enhancement. Mr. Schiffer addressed the matter of the Master Plan and Development Plans being submitted by a member of the AICP and he asked why. Nancy responded that they have to be signed off by a number of people; an engineer and planner, who is a member of the AICP, or a landscape architect. That was the consensus of the environmental community. Mr. Schiffer noted the AICP is a private organization. All architects need to be licensed. Mrs. Chambler said it is an effort to ensure the individual has expertise in land planning. Nancy could put in language that an architect be added that has expertise in land planning. The second hearing of the LDC Amendments, 2.2.2.7 Rural Lands Stewardship Areas Zoning Overlay will be held on May 14, 2003, at 5:05 PM. in the Council Chambers. The Public Hearing was closed at 10:00 AM. There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 11:55 AM. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Chairman Mr. Kenneth Abemathy