Loading...
DSAC-LDR Subcommittee Minutes 11/22/2019 (Draft) November 22, 2019 1 MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE Naples, Florida, November 22, 2019 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee – Land Development Review Subcommittee in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business here in, met on this date at 10:00 AM in REGULAR SESSION at the Growth Management Department Building, Room 609/610, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL with the following persons present: Chairman: Blair Foley Chris Mitchell Jeff Curl John English ALSO PRESENT: Matt McLean, Director, Development Review Amy Patterson, Director, Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees and Program Management Sally Ashkar, Assistant County Attorney Sonie Clarke-Boyle, GMD Permitting Gina Santabarbam, GMD Stormwater Michael Elgin, Minto Communities Lenny Perez Rick Long Alexander Showalter November 22, 2019 2 Any persons in need of the verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the audio recording from the Collier County Growth Management Division - Planning and Regulation building at 239-252-2400. 1. Call to order Mr. Foley called the meeting to order at 10:04 A.M. 2. Approve Agenda Mr. Foley moved to approve the agenda. Seconded by Mr. Curl. Carried unanimously. 3. New Business a. Structures in Easements – Policy and Procedure Mr. McLean reported during the November 6th Development Services Advisory Committee Meeting a discussion was had regarding encroachments within drainage easements. Historically there have been a lot of encroachments that have been approved with permits and/or built without permits specific to fences, AC pads, pool equipment, generators pavers, sidewalks, roof overhangs, which are considered smaller encroachments. The banking industry has gotten a lot tighter on lending money on sales of homes and many homes built in the 70’s and 80’s have encroachments beyond the aforementioned. For these older existing condition encroachments, Development Review working with the county attorney’s office has been processing easement use agreements as items for the Board of County Commissioners to hear and approve. Subsequently, in coordination with legal counsel, it was determined they shouldn’t be approving any new encroachments in drainage easements. Staff would like to move forward requesting policy direction from the Board of County Commissioners to discuss the smaller encroachments being allowed within easements as long as there is an Easement Use Agreement (EUA) attached to the building permit applications. The intent of the Easement Use Agreement is to have a document tied to the building permit and recorded with the property so that future challenges that are being seen when properties are being turned over could be avoided. Mr. Mitchell relayed that it’s important to include mechanical screen walls. He wanted to know if the actual process was subjective or will it be approved with proper documentation. He asked who approves or denies. Mr. McLean advised it is staff understanding that if the EUA policy direction is approved by the Board for certain minor structures that with the EUA and letters of no objection from the easement holders, then they would be in a position to issue the building permits. Mr. English questioned whether the language on the EUA regarding roof overhang is subject to being changed. b. Removal Use Agreement Concept Mr. McLean referenced the beginning of the meeting as delineation between: 1. The older, significant encroachment issues (Big Easement Use Agreement) 2. The newer, minor encroachment issues (Easement Use Agreement Light) Mr. Mitchell questioned whether conservation easement should be included to which Mr. McLean replied staff’s recommendation is to not include conservation easement as there is specific language in conservation easements as to what can and can’t be within them. Mr. Mitchell questioned if for the Use Agreement whether there is a method which is pre plat recorded and can be done with the submittal of a PPL. November 22, 2019 3 Mr. McLean replied saying the intent is to do it on a lot by lot basis as it is the minority of lots in a development that are affected, not the majority. Mr. English verified whether the agreement applies to ROW and PUE, to which Mr. McLean said he would include that in the discussion when bringing it to the Board. Mr. Mitchell questioned if a roof overhang was included or excluded. The current wording does state it’s included. Mr. English suggested language be changed to reference roof overhang that does not include the demand to remove clause. Mr. English and Mr. Mitchell are both concerned how older “stuff” will be handled regarding blanket Drainage Easements (DE). Mr. McLean reported for awareness the title of the document is drafted “Easement Use Agreement” and it brings about the following: 1. The fee schedule reads there is an application fee for Easement Use Agreement in the amount of $2,000. a. This is problematic for the staff as they believe it should be handled through the building permit process under the existing review. i. Staff would like the committee’s support to try to discuss either: 1. another name, or 2. direction from committee on the clarification that the Easement Use Agreement fee within the current fee schedule does not apply for these minor structures. Mr. Mitchell inquired whether it was the intent of Development Review to not include an additional fee but part of the building review process. Mr. McLean reported the intent is no additional fee necessary for the minor encroachments being discussed. Mr. Foley moved to rename “Easement Use Agreement” to “Easement Encroachment Agreement.” Seconded by Mr. Curl. Carried unanimously 4 – 0. Amy Patterson reports it will be reviewed by the full DSAC at their next meeting and feedback will be provided at the Board meeting. Mr. McLean reports the goal is to have this as a consent agenda item on the meeting before the board on December 10, 2019. Mr. English says for a matter of timing, the roof overhang is the most critical part and would like to know when they can see the final draft to the agreement before it goes to the Board. Mr. Foley moved, seconded by Mr. Mitchell, to make the following revisions to the Agreement: 1. Change the title to Easement Encroachment Agreement. November 22, 2019 4 2. Revise to reflect roof overhangs can stay and can’t be essentially torn out with notice. 3. This does not apply to the PUE/ROW. 4. Common area tracts with blanket easements which require an encroachment agreement will be considered in the context of the infrastructure requiring that easement, not necessarily the whole tract. 5. Mechanical screening associated with air conditioning / pads and pool equipment /pads should be incorporated as allowable in the easement encroachment agreement concept. 4. Public comments None 5. Next meeting December 4, 2019 6. Adjourn There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by Mr. Foley at 10:58 A.M. and was seconded by Mr. Mitchell. COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE – LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE _______________________________________________ These Minutes were approved by the Committee on _____________________, as presented __________, or as amended _________.