Loading...
CCPC Minutes 11/12/2003 SNovember 12, 2003 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION/LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Naples, Florida, November 12, 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 5:05 pm in SPECIAL SESSION in Building F of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Russell A. Budd Mark Strain Dwight Richardson Lindy Adelstein Brad Schiller Paul Midney Bob Murray George Evans Ken Abernathy ALSO IN ATTENDANCE: Joe Schmitt Marjorie Student Russ Mueller Page 1 November 12, 2003 Roll Call Call to Order Discussion of Agenda No swearing in of speakers or disclosures: Not a quasi-judicial proceeding. Next regular scheduled meeting on November 20th. Two others if needed on Nov. 24 at 5:00 PM and Dec. 1 at 2:00 PM. Continue what is not heard this evening until November 20th. November 13- Yanderbilt Beach Overlay and Coastal Setback will be continued. Stan Litsinger: Confirmed changes to agenda Marjorie stUdent: Confirmed meeting was properly advertised. Section 2.2.2.1/2: Rural Fringe Mixed District Marti Chumbler, Carlton Fields law firm Discussion of creation of new district. Review of Rural Fringe Mixed Use District Document Will review tab by tab. Requested not voting on tabs L or M (vegetation issues) and also on any oil and gas issues (tabs A,B and C and in definitions) be deferred until Nov. 20th. Ms. Student confirmed that certain items can be pulled out for second heating if necessary. Otherwise, one heating is sufficient. Tab A Areas to the south and northwest of Golden Gate Estates LDRs (land development regulations) will implement the provisions in the comprehensive plan to establish allowable densities within that area Mr. Murray asked about density bonus incentives. Ms. Chumbler directed him to the growth management plan. Mr. Richardson questioned "limited extension" in central water and sewer expansion on page 4. Suggested clarification language. Mr. Litsinger indicated that there is provision in the long range master plan to establish an eligible area to receive water and sewer between cluster developments that will be made available within receiving areas only on the future land use map. Page 2 November 12, 2003 Mr. Strain requested clarification on base density and additional density through TDRs. Is base density in addition to the TDRs. Ms. Chumbler confirmed that it was. If someone comes in for a development you must use TDR density first before you use up your base density. 1.2 dwelling per acre. Mr. Schiffer asked about maximum size for single-family lot at one acre. Mr. Mulhere explained that TDRs lead to clustering and establishing size of more than one acre does not constitute clustering. Discussion of receiving land and increase of density. 5,300 transfer of development fights. Hope some will go to rural village concept. Discussion of what constitutes a well planned clustered development. Mr. Strain asked about minimum project size of 40 acres. Do you need 40 TDRs? The answer is no if you do not need to maximize density on 40 acres. Discussed consistency of language in the document. It will be re-examined. TAB A, page 5. 1.4 units per acre confirmed. Allowable uses. Discussion of SIC codes. SIC codes occur in most land development code districts but not within the agricultural district. There will be reduction of SIC codes in the redesign of the LDC. Re-examine references on page 7, item 4 and item 6. Mr. Richardson asked for clarity of minimum project size. Mr. Mulhere indicated that farm labor housing is a different category and is within agricultural code. Mr. Schiffer- intent of the dormitory usage. Intent is for things like forestry services, staff housing, etc. Conservation uses. Discussion regarding potable vs. non-potable water. Golf courses. Discussion of recreational vehicle sites. Intent is to have no more. Clarification regarding family care and day care. Discussion of ADA regulations. Discussion of minimum lot size and setbacks. Zoning from Zone A to higher density levels with use of TDRs. Discussion of multi-family conditions, square footage and height of 50 feet. Height is measured from existing ground elevation or FEMA. Rural village minimum size of 300 acres. One per receiving area. Several builders could control property (rural village) together but be unified under one entity. PUD could be amended to increase this size. Discussion of greenbelt. Clarification needed regarding when it is included. Community character and design standards. It was a resource in designing the village. Reword public transportation reference on page 16. Clarify receiving/sending lands Clarify "footprint" as the entire parcel not just the building Discussion of "two distinct neighborhoods" and proximity as relates to economic differences, design standards, etc. Discussion of ratio of units to parking and shared parking concept (minimum of one space per unit). Re-evaluate design components of parking. Dining setbacks and encroachments Discussion of "dark sky" standards. Information will be revisited Financial impact analysis model in the process of being completed which the BCC will endorse which will be applied to all PUD rezones and will demonstrate the cost relative to the impact of development to be determined to be fiscally neutral or not Page 3 November 12, 2003 Fiscal neutrality must be demonstrated Discussion of shrubs and consistency Discussion of where the neutral lands are which have to do with natural resource value and not receiving or generating TDRs. Public Speaker John Vega, attorney for Husseys and trustees - Object to the adoption of the land development code change. Inappropriate for the North Belle Meade overlay lands. Dramatically disrupt the hydrology of the area. Lands which were wetlands are no longer. Average water level is 5 feet below surface elevation. Collier County stipulated that there has been a lowering of the water table in the North Belle Mead due to construction of the canals. - Effects of lowering water table are multiple: wetlands are dying, upland and exotic vegetation are reclaiming the area, wildfires increasing. - Fundamental flaw in the code change assumes that the areas away form which development is being directed will benefit the environment by being permitted to retain in their native state. There is no "native" state. The TDR program provides no incentive for the owners of the sending lands to become stewards of the environment. Two realities have to be faced: Such lands such as North Belle Mead should not be considered in the same way such as Corkscrew or South Belle Mead. And second, financial incentive must be provided to maintain or improve the land. Discussion over sending lands and TDR program which is in compliance with the comp. plan. Is it reasonable to suggest modifications within the incentive plan? It can be considered at a later date at the next growth management plan. Bruce Anderson, Esq. - Requested clarification on page 16, under the "Locational restriction and standards for rural villages." Para. B-2. Discussion of distance between villages as road miles. - Discussion of measurement as perimeter to perimeter. - Calculations will be reviewed Approved for second hearing with the caveat that some references need to be changed and corrected. Exception of oil, gas and parking. BREAK Tab B - Conditional versus non-conditional. Dictated by the comp. plan. Will be addressed more globally when discussion of oil and gas takes place. - Definition of 1/2 story. Page 4 November 12, 2003 No Public Speakers Approved for second hearing with exception of oil and gas. Tab C RLSA Baseline standards. - Discussion of design standards to ensure environmental protection, primarily as it related to wetlands and listed species and their habitat o Discussion of pavement width, parking, waste pick-up - Revisit the building code issues - Discussion of open spaces and parks and TDRs More open space in receiving areas that surround the rural village Size of blocks: 2500 foot perimeter Landscape islands and tree diamonds: Minimum of one canopy tree. Will revisit that. One canopy tree may not fit on diamond. Building height- no restriction- language clarification Discussion of FARs and minimum perimeter. Signage: Discussion of what is appropriate. Political signs and special event signs are acceptable with special permits. Also discussion of hanging signs. Possible rewording needed. Will revisit. - Buffering language be deleted. - Minimal buffering requirements for hamlet and as you move up requirements will increase. - Clarification of pathway. Multi-use. Needs to be defined. - Redefine property lines and parking - Discussion of setbacks and consistency. Sameness was the intent. Change language to reflect that. - Fencing- wooden, chain link prohibited in some places. Will clarify where prohibited and where not. Gopher tortoises and contiguous area. Clarification of language. Intent is to not allow the best gopher tortoise habitat to be carved up Bald Eagle issue- 1999 requirement, considering advisement and comments from state and federal agencies. Language will be clarified as well as intent Public Speakers Brad Cornell, Audobon Society - Concerns over pesticide reference on page 29- F, #5. - Policies for pesticide use and regulation should be county wide and not just on golf courses. Nicole Ryan, The Conservancy - Concerns over golf courses being placed in habitat and flow waster stewardship area. - Conservancy volunteered to assist in drafting language. EAC did place this in their recommendation of approval. - Discussion of dark sky criteria Page 5 November 12, 2003 Approved for second heating with exception ofoil and gas and parking and supporting the EAC recommendation. Tab D Deals with the natural resource protection overlay districts - Discussion of where the overlays are - Change reference to A, B and C instead of just A and C. - Status quo No Public Speakers Motions on Tabs and Sections Ms. Student reminded that the finding of consistency with the growth management plan be considered as part of each motion since the motions are separate. 1. Mr. Strain made a motion to approve Section 2.2.2 1.2 which references Tab A and find it consistent with the growth management plan with the exception of the oil and gas issues, minimum parking issues and dark skies. Seconded by Adelstein. 9-0 2. Mr. Strain made a motion to approve Section 2.2.17 which references Tab B and find it consistent with the growth management plan with the exception of the oil and gas issues and deferral of the issue of list of protected species. Seconded by Adlestein. 9-0. 3. Mr. Strain made a motion to approve Section 2.2.27.11 which references Tab C and find it consistent with the growth management plan with the exception of the oil and gas issues supported with the EAC and their remaining questions. Amendment added: also exception of streets and alleys, parking, special event signage and definition of pathway. Seconded by Adlestein. 9-0. 4. Mr. Strain made a motion to approve Section 2.2.30 which references Tab D and find it consistent with the growth management plan with no exceptions. Seconded by Adlestein. 9-0. Balance of information will be continued to November 20th at 8:30 a.m. Regular land use petitions will be addressed afterwards. Joe Schmitt handed out updated Vanderbilt Overlay report for the meeting on Nov. 13. The council requested additional information to review if needed. Joe Schmitt confirmed that staff met with Vanderbilt residents on the morning of Nov 12 and little feedback was given from residents. Dissatisfaction was still presented. Ms. Student indicated that Mr. Wiegel requested that the comments that he made at the meeting on October 22nd be considered. MEETING ADJOURNED AT 8:15 PM. Page 6 November 12, 2003 COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Chairman Mr. Russell Budd Page 7