Loading...
DSAC Minutes 09/03/2003 RSeptember 3, 2003 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Naples, Florida, September 3, 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 Conference Room "E" in the Collier County Development Services Center, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: ALSO PRESENT: CHAIRMAN: Peter VanArsdale Charles Abbott Dalas Disney Robert Duane - Absent Marco Espinar Blair Foley Brian Jones - Absent Dino Longo Robert Mulhere Justin Martin Thomas Masters Brian Milk - Absent Thomas Peek Herbert Savage Amy Patterson - CDES Garrett Mullee - CDES Phil Tindall - Transportation Roger Kastel - WW Reuse Patrick White - Assistant County Attorney Joe Schmitt - Community Dev. & Environmental Services Russell Webb - Planning Page 1 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA September 3, 2003 3:30 p.m. Approval of Agenda Approval of Minutes-August 6, 2003 Meeting Staff Announcements A. Development Services Division Update B. Transportation Division Update C. Public Utilities Division Update IV. Old Business V. Subcommittee Reports A. Land Development Regulation (Bob Duane) B. Operations and Budget (Dino Longo) C. Utility Code (Justin Martin) VI. New Business A. Indexi,nn~l of Road Impact Fees B. LDC 2 Cycle Amendments- Russell Webb C. Review of proposed changes to CDES fees VII. Committee Member Comments September 3, 2003 Chairman Peter VanArsdale called the meeting to order at 3:35 PM. Approval of Agenda - a revised Agenda was handed out. Mr. VanArsdale has a letter to pass out under "Old Business". Tom Peek moved to approve the Agenda. Dino Longo Seconded. Carried unanimously 8-0. II. Approval of Minutes - August 6, 2003. Tom Peek mentioned there are duplicate pages of the minutes in their packet and the format used for the Sub- Committee was rather confusing. Joe Schmitt informed the Committee that Aha has taken a different position and Sue Rossi along with a temp is helping in the office. Connie is trying to keep things together until they get staffed. Tom Peek moved to approve the minutes. Seconded by Herb Savage. Carried unanimously 9-0. III. Staff Announcements: A. Development Services Division Update - Joe Schmitt - informed the committee Margaret Wuerstle has tendered her resignation and has not appointed a new Planning Service Director at this time. Stan, Susan and Randy will report directly to him until he knows what exactly he is going to do. As to fees, he will give updates to the Committee when they have the business system purchase. There will be impacts for about six months and will try to shorten the fielding time and process mapping. Be Transportation Division Update - Phil Tindall reported they are working on check book concurrency. Stan reported they will have the draft of the LDC filed next week. Joe Schmitt said the Comp Plan Amendment goes to the Board of County Commissioners - the 1 vs. 3 years. They are supporting the 1 year as it is supported by the BCC. The Comp Plan will come back in October and then December and January when the 3rd cycle of the LDC goes to the BCC. The Comp Plan Amendment has gone to the Board 6 weeks ago and to DCA for transmittal and will go for adoption in November. Peter VanArsdale was wondering if the Committee should take a stand on the Comp Plan Amendment. Bob Mulhere mentioned in reality it is a political issue. The Board voted 3-2 - for adoption it needs a super majority vote. The approval by the Board for rezoning will not take place unless staff can validate the issuance of a local development order of one year the improvements will be in place. The local development order will either be a Site Development Plan or Final Plat. The improvements need to be already started in Transportation. Stan talked about the "Real Time" declining balance ledger. (The 1 vs. 3 year) Discussion pursued about what roads are deficient under the different cycles and Transportation Concurrency Management concepts. Page 2 September 3, 2003 IV. Dino Longo asked about where the accountability is. He wonders if it actually happens. Joe answered if Staff and Board approve it, they are basically given assurance the project will be constructed within the twelve months. He also mentioned the only way the LDC would be changed is to go back and change the Comp Plan. Dino was still concerned about the accountability, and a developer spending millions of dollars and then wondering if it will really happen or not. Stan noted the Certificates are still issued for three years. So if the road is not built on schedule, and the developer is holding a certificate, they will not be stopped on going forward. Dalas Disney felt the Chairman should write a letter to the Board of County Commissioners on how important it is to have the three year vs. the 1 year. But a legitimate rationale of why should be stated and not be self-serving. The issue is that it would result in less than a negative impact and fewer consequences to the industry that is already suffering. The perception from the Public is different than what the issue really is. It is a lack of understanding from the Public regarding the SDP or final plat and when the project is actually finished. That is why the Board is looking at the 12 months. David Ellis, CBI - has had discussion with staff and DCA and they are alarmed at the information received and concerned about the one year scenario. There may still be some shifting and compromising and definitely some concerns. He will provide the Committee with information he has gathered. (Maps etc.) It is confusing and political at this time. It was noted the Commissioners that voted against were Commissioners Henning and Coletta. They want to go with the longer timeframe. C. Public Utilities Division Update - None Old Business: Update on FEMA - Joe Schmitt reported they have had a conference call with FEMA and have gotten a 6 month extension. He is asking the Board for a Budget Amendment for $47,000 that will pay for more data and a company to come out a validate sites and verification of maps. (2D Study) They have to go back to the Contractor and have them certify it to The Federal Standards to the specifications FEMA requires. The LightR data is missing and needs to be certified. Marco asked about the current vacant DEP position and funding. Joe Schmitt said it has gone nowhere with no action. Page 3 September 3, 2003 New Business: A. Indexing of Road Impact Fees - Amy Patterson gave a visual presentation on the indexing of the Roads Impact Fees Annual Mid-Year. (Enclosed in packet) - Gave Requirements for the indexing establish by Ordinance 2002-66 which was adopted by the BCC on December 3, 2002. - Timeline was given for Implementation - Resolution presented to BCC on September 9, 2003. - Staff is recommending a delayed effective date of October 1, 2003. - Examples were shown of Proposed Road Impact Fees for Single Family, Office, Retail and Industrial. Mid year Indexing - every three years - they will do a full impact fee Study and this is an Annual Study. Every October 1st an adjustment will be made. An update and accumulative fees will be put in the Committees next packet. Dalas Disney asked where they stood in the state as far as ranking in impact fees - the answer is "highest" - he said now they are going to go up again 9.4% average. He stated he is not too thrilled and if the elected officials had any backbone at all, they would adjust the ad Valorem taxes to take the burden off. Amy gave the 7 areas of impact updates. (Correctional Facilities and Law Enforcement, the Schools, Emergency Medical Services, Library and Government Buildings) Dino Longo wondered what standards they are using in the County. His concerns are the landscaping of medians which have been ripped out several times along Davis and Pine Ridge - are they designing the roads with certain criteria. What design is utilized to calculate construction per lane mile? There is past history of road data. When a fee goes up Amy will report to the Committee. LDC 2nd Cycle Amendments - Russell Webb - reported that 2.2.16.2.1. Change was: Adding four uses to the industrial district section. 2.4.4.2. Change was: Clearly state that palms may be substituted for up to 30% of entire parking lot plantings and Type D right-of-way buffers. Bob Mulhere moved to recommend approval of the changes to the two LDC Amendments as presented. Tom Peek Second. Carried unanimously 11-0. The date for the next LDC Sub-Committee is September 17th at 2:00 PM. Page 4 September 3, 2003 Discussion followed on the cycles, timing and number of cycles. C. Review of Proposed Changes to CDES fees - Joe Schmitt passed out two handouts for his presentation. (Enclosed) A slide presentation was given. The cost of doing business: - Department Revenue and Expenses and Funds 113 and 131. - Each will be free standing. - Re-Slicing Fee Revenue Pie - How Individual Fees are computed - Proposed Fee Schedule Changes - Future Events & Commitments The other hand-out: Fiscal Year 2004 Community Development & Environmental Services Proposed Fee Changes. (Enclosed) Will adjust fees if necessary yearly or sooner if needed. He is committed to earn only the Revenues that are needed to operate. If the fees do not get approved, he has two options, one is to get General Fund money from Board or cut staff. Some of the projections were discussed. Joe stated they need to look at the PUD Amendment process again. Dalas Disney didn't feel any of the figures presented correlated with what was talked about in Sub-Committee. Appropriations were overstated and the revenues were understated, he could not figure out any of the numbers and was quite concerned. Herb Savage would like to pass the report and give it 6 months or a year review on this format. After a lengthy discussion Dino decided to give his Subcommittee Report on Operations and Budget: - Issues in Efficiency and Accountability - Interest - line item in Budget - What are we getting? -Govemrnent is inefficient - Get an "efficient" operating system - Funds are separated - Is it fair and equitable? - Board requirements of staff time. (Now separated out) - This time next year - accountability - Standards set - After new Computer System better tracking - More efficient at what they do. Page 5 September 3, 2003 - Shifted dollars Joe is looking to the Committee to help evaluate some of the processes. Some changes are being made already. Bob Mulhere reviewed and questioned different categories in the report of the proposed fee changes. Joe mentioned the two committees - The Productivity Committee and the Revenue Committees are two different Committees. Some of the same people are on them, but they are different. The Subcommittee will meet on Wed., September 10th at 3:00, and Dino is asking for questions from the Committee. Bob Mulhere left at 5:30 PM. Dino Longo moved to approve the Proposed Fee Changes subject to the Subcommittee approval on any issues or conditions raised by the Subcommittee. Seconded Dalas Disney. Carried unanimously 10-0. Tom Masters & Blair Foley left at 5:32 PM. VI. Subcommittee Reports: A. Land Development Regulation (Bob Duane) - Marco reported the LDC Cycle 3 Subcommittee meeting will be September 17th, 2:00 PM. B. Operations and Budget (Dino Longo) - given above C. Utility Code (Justin Martin) - Continued next month. D. Letter from Chairman VanArsdale - handed out letter for the Board of County Commissioners concerning getting their interest money returned. Patrick White warited to clarify whose money it really is after it is turned over to the County. VII. Committee Member Comments - None There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 5:36 PM. COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE Chairman Peter VanArsdale Page 6