Agenda 07/09/2024 Item #11B (Updaiting Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Rate for CCWSD)07/09/2024
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to advertise for future consideration an Ordinance
amending Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, which is the Collier County
Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, providing for the incorporation by reference the impact fee study;
amending the Water and Wastewater impact fee rate schedule; providing for an effective date of December 1,
2024, in accordance with the 90-day notice requirement set forth in Section 163.31801(4)(d), Florida Statutes;
and providing for revised definitions and update of the provisions related to the adoption and collection of
impact fees.
OBJECTIVE: To advertise an ordinance amendment to adopt the Impact Fee Rate Study ("Study") prepared by
Raftelis updating water and wastewater impact fee rates for the Collier County Water -Sewer District (the "District")
to ensure the resulting revenues are sufficient to recover system capital expansion infrastructure costs in line with
the county's strategic focus area objective to plan and build public infrastructure and facilities to effectively,
efficiently, and sustainably meet the need of our community. These utility expansion plans are depicted in the Water
and Wastewater sections of the 2023 Annual Update Inventory Report (AUIR).
CONSIDERATIONS: Impact fees are collected in order to provide a source of revenue to fund the growth driven
new capacity construction and improvements to the District's infrastructure. As such, Collier County has used
impact fees as a funding source for growth -related capital improvements. Parallel to this process needed funding to
operate and maintain new facilities provided by User -fee Rate Studies as presented in Impact Fee Study Overview
attached.
Impact fees require development to contribute its fair share to the cost of improvements and additions to
infrastructure but may not be charged in excess of the amount anticipated to offset the demand on the respective
facility.
Water and Wastewater Impact fees have been in place in Collier County since 1978 and are assessed both
residential and commercial construction. On December 10, 2019, as Agenda Item 9C, the Board approved
Ordinance 2019-48 which provided impact fee rates for water and wastewater with an effective date of March 30,
2020. The district historically updates impact fees regularly. The table demonstrates the historically approved water
and wastewater impact fee rates along with the proposed impact fee rates.
2005-252 2006.026 2007-057 2008.202 2011-41 2015-017 2017-013 2019.48 2024 Proposed
Water
$2,760.00 $3,415.00
$3,616.49
$3,575.00
$3,205.00
$2,600.00
$2,562.00
$3,382.00
$6,470.00
Wastewater
3,125.00 3,515.00
3,722.39
3,495.00
3,220.00
2,515.00
2,701.00
3,314.00
5,614.00
Total
$5,885.00 $6,930.00
$7,338.88
$7,070.00
$6,425.00
$5,115.00
$5,263.00
$6,696.00
$12,084.00
Chanae:
-3.77
-9.1%
-20.47.
2.9%
27.27.
70.9%
Dollar
$1,045.00
$408.88
($268.88)
($645.00)
($1,310.00)
$148.00
$1,433.00
$5,388.00
Percent
17.87.
5.9%
-3.77.
-9.1%
-20.47.
2.9%
27.27.
80.5%
Water/Sewer Impact Fee History
$14,000
$12,000
$10,000
$8,000 $6,930 $7,339 $7,070
5 $6,425
$6,000
$4,000
$2,000
y
$0
NE Facilities in Design (12/14/0410E) I NE Facilities in Hybernation (2/26/1016C2) I Design -Build CCWRF/NESA
Staff engaged Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. ("Consultant") to perform an impact fee rate study to identify the
Packet Pg. 55
07/09/2024
revenues necessary to recover growth related costs associated with the district's capacity expansion identified in the
10-year planning horizon of the 2023 AUIR, including:
As a prerequisite to a septic to sewer conversion project in Golden Gate City, a 4 MGD (Million Gallons
per Day) wastewater treatment capacity project for the Collier County Central Water Reclamation Facility
(CCCWRF) at the current treatment plant site is anticipated to be on-line in 2027
4 MGD wastewater treatment capacity project for the Northeast Regional Water Reclamation Facility
(NERWRF), anticipated to be on-line in 2030
10 MGD water treatment project for the Northeast Regional Water Treatment Plant (NERWTP),
anticipated to be on-line in 2033
The report describes the technical and legal framework and the methodology used to update water and wastewater
impact fees. The updates utilized the same approach and methodology used in the preceding updates. Staff and the
Consultant thoroughly reviewed the study with the County's outside legal counsel, Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson,
P.A.
The update utilizes the same approach and methodology used in the preceding updates. The major elements
associated with the study include:
• Asset inventory
• Level of Service
• Capital Projects - Growth
• Remaining available capacity
The proposed Water and Wastewater fee schedule as shown in Appendix "A" of the attached ordinance amendment
is considered by the Consultant to be the most accurate and legally defensible option for the imposition of these
impact fees.
Population projections received as part of the recent AUIR continue to demonstrate the need for regional expansion
not only on the northeast utility site, but growth in the area of Activity Center 9 and surrounding area require
additional growth -related capacity to be located on the Golden Gate site.
Staff thoroughly reviewed the Study with the Development Services Advisory Committee (DSAC) Utility Sub -
Committee on March 13 and subsequently with the full DSAC on April 3. The three subcommittee members and
the DSAC chair recommended more current updates to the Impact Fee Rate Study, rather than once every three
years, which is reasonable given current and past growth projections. Staff discussed affordability and DSAC was
pleased to see the Rate Schedule included scaled down fees for smaller units.
Residential Master Metered
living space
Water
Sewer
Total
% of Total
0 - 750 sq ft
$2,135
$1,852
$3,987
33%
751 - 1,500 sq ft
$4,334
$3,761
$8,095
67%
> 1,500 sq ft
$6,470
$5,614
$12,084
100%
At the conclusion of the presentation, DSAC unanimously agreed to accept the Collier County Water and
Wastewater Impact Fee Rate Study.
Since expansion funding generally requires issuance of a Bond, the Bond Rating Agencies regularly review the
district's historical and projected financials and assess risk associated with the utility. On May 7, 2024, Fitch
reaffirmed the District's AAA credit rating and stable outlook as they did in 2023 citing:
• robust liquidity
Packet Pg. 56
07/09/2024
• disciplined rate setting
• service area growth
The AAA rating enables the utility to borrow at favorable rates. The CCWSD is anticipating new debt issuance
within the rate setting timeline related to the 4 MGD capacity expansion at the Golden Gate Wastewater
Reclamation Facility and continued investment at the northeast utility site. Maintaining this rating is key to future
borrowing at the lowest cost related to impact fee funded expansion projects.
Also included in the proposed Ordinance Amendment is new language to address statutory changes related to the
defmition of infrastructure and provisions related to the adoption and collection of impact fees.
FISCAL IMPACT: Revenue projections related to the updating of individual impact fees depends heavily on
permitting activity during the time period of an impact fee increase. Any changes in permitting activity and trends
associated with residential product mix and/or commercial and other non-residential buildings being constructed in
Collier County will directly affect the impact fee revenue stream. Any building permits that are in process via a
complete building permit application submission are not subject to imposition of revised impact fees. In
accordance with the 90-day notice requirement set forth in Section 163.31801(4)(d), Florida Statutes, the updated
water and wastewater impact fees will apply to all residential and commercial permits submitted on or after
December 1, 2024. These policies and requirements cause a significant delay in the recognition of the additional
revenue associated with the increase in impact fees.
As discussed above, the residential product mix as well as the intensity of the commercial and other non-residential
land uses being permitted affect the revenue generated by a proposed increase in impact fees and there is not always
a direct relationship between the percentage of rate increase and the actual increased dollar amount of collections.
Therefore, a 80.5% increase in impact fee rates does not immediately generate a 80.5% increase in revenue.
The fiscal year 2024 impact fee revenue budget was prepared using the currently approved impact fee rates. Current
year budget for water impact fee revenues of $8,000,000 in the Water Impact Fee Fund (4011) and wastewater
impact fee revenues of $8,000,000 in the Wastewater Impact Fee Fund (4013) are still forecasted in line with
budget. Impact fees are restricted -use funds which may only be used to pay for growth -related capacity expansion
and growth -related debt service.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: The adoption of the proposed impact fee updates is consistent with
Objective 2 of the Capital Improvement Element (CIE) of the Collier County Growth Management Plan, which
states: "Future development will bear a proportionate cost of facility improvements necessitated by growth."
The proposed impact fee rates are designed to provide adequate funding for the acquisition of land and the
construction of facilities and capital improvements necessitated by growth. However, impact fees may not be
collected in excess of the amount reasonably anticipated to fund such improvements. The proposed impact fee rates
represent an accurate assessment of the cost of providing public facilities attributable to new development.
Additionally, this approach is consistent with Section 163.31801, Florida Statutes, which is the Florida Impact Fee
Act, requiring the most recent and localized data be utilized in impact fee calculations.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed by the County Attorney, is approved as to form and
legality, and requires majority vote for approval. -JAK
RECOMMENDATION: To authorize the County Attorney to advertise for future consideration an ordinance
amending Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, which is the Collier County
Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, providing for the incorporation by reference the impact fee study; amending
the Water and Wastewater impact fee rate schedule; providing for an effective date of December 1, 2024, in
accordance with the 90-day notice requirement set forth in Section 163.31801(4)(d), Florida Statutes; and
providing for revised definitions and update of the provisions related to the adoption and collection of impact fees.
Packet Pg. 57
11.B
07/09/2024
Prepared by: Joseph Bellone, Director Utilities Finance
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. {LINKED }Collier County 2024 Impact Fee Report (Final) (PDF)
2. Business Impact Estimate - Water Wastewater Impact Fee Study - CAO rev. 4.9 (PDF)
3. DSAC 4-3-24 Unsigned Minutes (PDF)
4. Anticipated Utility Expansion vl (PDF)
5. Ordinance - Stamped (PDF)
6. CCWSD Impact Fee Presentation 06-11-24 Short (PPTX)
7. CBIA Letter to BCC Ref Water.Sewer Impact Fees 06.10.24 (PDF)
Packet Pg. 58
11.B
07/09/2024
COLLIER COUNTY
Board of County Commissioners
Item Number: 11.13
Doc ID: 28534
Item Summary: Recommendation to authorize the County Attorney to advertise for future consideration an
Ordinance amending Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances, which is the Collier County
Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, providing for the incorporation, by reference, the impact fee study; amending
the Water and Wastewater impact fee rate schedule; providing for an effective date of December 1, 2024, in
accordance with the 90-day notice requirement set forth in Section 163.31801(4)(d), Florida Statutes; and providing
for revised definitions and update of the provisions related to the adoption and collection of impact fees. (Joe
Bellone, Director Utilities Finance)
Meeting Date: 07/09/2024
Prepared by:
Title: — Public Utilities Operations Support
Name: Vincent Dominach
04/09/2024 3:10 PM
Submitted by:
Title: Division Director - Operations Support — Public Utilities Operations Support
Name: Joseph Bellone
04/09/2024 3:10 PM
Approved By:
Review:
Public Utilities Operations Support Joseph Bellone PUD Reviewer
Public Utilities Department Vincent Dominach Level 1 Department Review
Public Utilities Operations Support Katrina Lin PUD Reviewer
Capital Project Planning, Impact Fees, and Program Management Ian Barnwell
Public Utilities Department
Office of Management and Budget
County Attorney's Office
Community & Human Services
County Manager's Office
Board of County Commissioners
George Yilmaz
Level 2 Division Administrator Review
Debra Windsor
Level 3 OMB Gatekeeper Review
Jeffrey A. Klatzkow Level 3 County Attorney's Office Review
Maggie Lopez
OMB Reviewer
Amy Patterson
Level 4 County Manager Review
Geoffrey Willig
Meeting Pending
Completed
05/07/2024 3:42 PM
Completed
05/08/2024 7:40 AM
Completed
05/21/2024 3:10 PM
Additional Reviewer
Completed
06/28/2024 6:18 AM
Completed
07/01/2024 1:43 PM
Completed
07/01/2024 1:56 PM
Completed
07/01/2024 2:29 PM
Completed
07/01/2024 2:57 PM
Completed
07/03/2024 11:41 AM
07/09/2024 9:00 AM
Packet Pg. 59
11.B.b
Business Impact Estimate
This form should be included in the agenda packet for the item under which the proposed
ordinance is to be considered and must be posted on the County's website by the time notice of
the proposed ordinance is published.
Publish on County website prior to: [expected legal advertising date]
Proposed ordinance's Short Title:
Amending Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances (the
Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance) for changes to the water and
wastewater impact fees.
This Business Impact Estimate is provided in accordance with section 125.66(3), Florida
Statutes. If one or more boxes are checked below, this means the County is of the view
that a business impact estimate is not required by state law' for the proposed ordinance,
but the County is, nevertheless, providing this Business Impact Estimate as a courtesy
and to avoid any procedural issues that could impact the enactment of the proposed
ordinance. This Business Impact Estimate may be revised following its initial posting.
❑ The proposed ordinance is required for compliance with Federal or State law or
regulation;
❑ The proposed ordinance relates to the issuance or refinancing of debt;
0 The proposed ordinance relates to the adoption of budgets or budget
amendments, including revenue sources necessary to fund the budget;
❑ The proposed ordinance is required to implement a contract or an agreement,
including, but not limited to, any Federal, State, local, or private grant or other
financial assistance accepted by the county government;
❑ The proposed ordinance is an emergency ordinance;
❑ The ordinance relates to procurement; or
❑ The proposed ordinance is enacted to implement the following:
a. Part II of Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, relating to growth policy, county and
municipal planning, and land development regulation, including zoning,
development orders, development agreements and development permits;
b. Sections 190.005 and 190.046, Florida Statutes, regarding community
development districts;
c. Section 553.73, Florida Statutes, relating to the Florida Building Code; or
d. Section 633.202, Florida Statutes, relating to the Florida Fire Prevention Code.
1 See Section 125.66(3)(c), Florida Statutes.
Packet Pg. 60
11.B.b
In accordance with the provisions of controlling law, even notwithstanding the fact that
an exemption noted above may apply, the County hereby publishes the following
information:
1. Summary of the proposed ordinance (must include a statement of the public purpose,
such as serving the public health, safety, morals and welfare):
To provide revenue for bond debt service necessary to provide incremental
capacity to treat potable water and wastewater providing such services within the
Water -Sewer District Service area required by the Special Act of the Florida
Legislature, Chapter 2003-353 such that growth pays for growth.
2. An estimate of the direct economic impact of the proposed ordinance on private, for -
profit businesses in the County, if any:
(a) An estimate of direct compliance costs that businesses may reasonably incur;
(b) Any new charge or fee imposed by the proposed ordinance or for which businesses
will be financially responsible; and
(c) An estimate of the County's regulatory costs, including estimated revenues from any
new charges or fees to cover such costs.
Builders will be required to pay impact fees at issuance of certificate of occupancy.
3. Good faith estimate of the number of businesses likely to be impacted by the proposed
ordinance:
all builders permitted to build residential and commercial facilities in Collier County
4. Additional information the governing body deems useful (if any):
[You may wish to include in this section the methodology or data used to prepare the
Business Impact Estimate. For example: County staff solicited comments from
businesses in the County as to the potential impact of the proposed ordinance by
contacting the chamber of commerce, social media posting, direct mail or direct email,
posting on County website, public workshop, etc. You may also wish to include efforts
made to reduce the potential fiscal impact on businesses. You may also wish to state
here that the proposed ordinance is a generally applicable ordinance that applies to all
persons similarly situated (individuals as well as businesses) and, therefore, the proposed
ordinance does not affect only businesses).
Staff solicitated comment and approval from the Development Services Advisory
Committee which unanimously accepted the Rate Study identifying fees required
to construct new capacity to serve new customers.
2
Packet Pg. 61
From page 21 of the FY24 Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study, the proposed
water and wastewater impact fees are as follows:
3
,,--rrtary of Propose" and lnv-ir'+ Fees
Description Basis of Fee ERC Factor [11 Water Fee Wastewater Fee
Residential (Meter) per ERC 1.00 $6,470.00 55.614.00
Multi -family �sq. ff.)
0 —750 sq_ ft_ per Unit 0.33 $2,135.00 $1,852.00
751 — 1,a110 sq. ft. per Unit 0.67 4,334A0 3,761.00
1,501 sq. ft. or More per Unit 1.00 6.470.00 5,614.00
Nan -residential (Meter)
314inch
per Meter Size
1.00
$6,470.00
$5,614A0
1-inch
per Meter Size
1.67
10.804.00
9r375.00
1-1l2-inch
per Meter Size
3.33
21,545A0
18,694.00
2�nch
per Meter Size
5.33
34,485.00
29,922.00
34nch
per Meter Size
15.00
97.050.00
84,210.00
4�nch
per Meter Size
33.33
215.645.00
187.114.00
64nch
per Meter Size
66.67
431,354.00
374,285.00
8-inch
per Meter Size
116.67
754,854.00
654,985.00
[1] Equivalent Residential Connection (ERC} factors for non-residential cusforners reflect rated hydraulic capacity of meter divided by 30
gallons per minutes based on rate capacity of smallest meter size.
a�
aD
LL
w
to
a
E
L
d
to
3
aD
r
to
c
L
R
M
LO
00
N
as
Packet Pg. 62
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
Naples, Florida
April 3, 2024
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Development Services Advisory
Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on
this date at 3 P.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Growth Management
Community Department Building, Conference Room #609/610, 2800 Horseshoe Drive
North, Naples, Florida, with the following members present:
Chairman: William J. Varian
Vice Chairman: Blair Foley
James E. Boughton
Clay Brooker (excused)
Jeff Curl
David Dunnavant
John English
Marco Espinar (excused)
Norman Gentry
Mark McLean
Chris Mitchell
Robert Mulhere
Laura Spurgeon-DeJohn
Jeremy Sterk (excused)
Mario Valle
Hannah Roberts—AHAC non -voting (excused)
ALSO PRESENT:
Amy Patterson, Collier County Manager
Trinity Scott, Department Head, Transportation Management Services
Jaime Cook, Director, Development Review
Thomas Iandimarino, Director, Code Enforcement
Christopher Mason, Director, Community Planning & Resiliency
Drew Cody, Supervisor -Project Management, Public Utilities
Cormac Giblin, Director, Housing Policy & Economic Development
Lorraine Lantz, Manager, Transportation Management Services
Linda Naples, North Collier Fire Review
Bryan Horbal, Captain -Life Safety & Fire Prevention, North Collier Fire
Michael Stark, Director, Operations & Regulatory Management
Jason Badge, Supervisor -Project Management, Ops & Regulatory Management
Richard Long, Director, Building Plan Review & Inspection, GMCD
Joseph Bellone, Director, Utilities Finance, Public Utilities
Diane Lynch, Management Analyst II/Staff Liaison GMCD
Rey Torres Fuentes, Ops Support Specialist I, GMCD
Page 1 of 20
Packet Pg. 63
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
Any persons needing the verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the
audio recording from the Collier County Growth Management Community
Department.
1. Call to Order — Chairman
Chairman Varian called the meeting to order at 3 p.m.
A quorum of 10 was present in the boardroom; two members joined later.
2. Approval of Agenda
Mr. Curl moved to approve the agenda. Mr. Mulhere seconded it. The motion passed
unanimously, 10-0.
3. Approval of Minutes
Chairman Varian said there was a small change on the attendance page, so we need to
note that there was a change.
Mr. Curl said that at the bottom of page 10, it also should say Mr. Curl said: the roadway he's
on is a 20-foot road that functions as our multi -use path.
a. DSAC Meeting — February 7, 2024
Mr. Curl made a motion to approve the March 6, 2024, DSAC meeting minutes, as
amended. Mr. Mitchell seconded it. The motion passed unanimously, 10-0.
b. DSAC-LDR Subcommittee Meeting — March 13, 2024
Mr. Foley, chair of the subcommittee, made a motion to approve the March 13, 2024,
DSAC Utilities Subcommittee meeting minutes. Mr. Mitchell seconded it. The motion
passed unanimously, 2-0.
4. Public Speakers
(None)
5. Staff Announcements/Updates
a. Development Review Division — [Jaime Cook, Director]
Ms. Cook provided a legislative update:
• Staff is working on changes due to Senate Bill 812, which was passed on March 6. It
specifically is in reference to expedited review of building permits and will affect some
planners and engineers.
• There's language to allow applicants to identify up to 50% of the homes or building
permits that can be issued before a plat is recorded. That goes into effect October 1.
• By the end of 2027, it would be 75% of the building permits that can be issued prior to
plat reporting.
• There are provisions that say if an applicant will be requesting permits, they need to
request them at the time of submittal, so with your plat application for your PPL or your
final plat, a bond must be in place.
• Currently, you're not providing the bond until you go to plat recording, but it's required
with your PPL approval.
• Additionally, you cannot get a TCO or CO until the plat is recorded.
Page 2 of 20
Packet Pg. 64
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
• The governor hasn't signed it yet, but it's imminent and will require some updates from
staff so within the next six months we're going to update the applications and make
some program changes in CityView to monitor how many building permits we're
issuing.
• There will be code changes to the LDC and Administrative Code because they currently
say that you cannot get building permits, except for model homes.
• All of this may require some fee changes.
• She wanted the DSAC to be aware of this as we work through it over the next six
months. As we get closer and have a final process, she'll update the DSAC again.
Mr. Mitchell asked if the bonding is the state's or Collier County's requirement.
Ms. Cook said it's a state requirement. The language in the statute says I can request to bond
up to 130%. Collier County is currently 110. She doesn't foresee going to up that, but it's
required in the statute.
Mr. Mitchell asked if the language says "can" or "shall."
Ms. Cook said it says I can charge up to 130%.
Mr. Mitchell asked if it says you have to bond.
Ms. Cook said yes. You have to bond and you can charge up to 130% of that.
b. Code Enforcement Division — [Thomas Iandimarino, Director]
Mr. Iandimarino provided a March update:
• In Contractor Licensing, about 55 new cases were opened, 66 were closed and 10
citations were issued.
• For staff training, we're sending six investigators to Cape Coral next week for
fundamentals and code enforcement. We won't have to pay additional travel, other than
the comp time to travel to Cape Coral. We normally only send two or three employees.
Chairman Varian asked what the citations were for.
Mr. Iandimarino said unlicensed work, working outside the scope of their license, or a
combination of the two. He didn't get details but provide that if you want to know.
Mr. Curl said that in the past three weeks, he's fielded a few inquiries from land -use attorneys
about when one or two trees come down, Code Enforcement is called and then it balloons into
an SDPI. He doesn't know the policy, but why isn't it as simple as a tree comes down, put a
tree back?
Mr. Iandimarino said that's not so much a question for him but he can direct you to someone
who can answer, maybe Ms. Cook.
A discussion ensued between Mr. Iandimarino and Mr. Curl and the following points were
made:
• Why can't it be as simple as replacing the same tree on the same spot?
• Code Enforcement gets a determination from Jaime's division and we inform the
landowner that that's what they have to do.
• It could be for one tree or for multiple trees.
[Mr. Gentry joined the meeting at 3: 08 p.m.]
Page 3 of 20
Packet Pg. 65
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
• It involves only one or two trees and an HOA. It should have been an oak tree or
hardwood and they don't want hardwoods anymore. They want a different species.
• If they change, it doesn't match the plan and you need a permit.
• But if you replace an oak with an oak, it matches the permit.
• Mr. Iandimarino said it's not always that easy.
[Mr. Curl and Mr. Iandimarino agreed to get together to discuss this after the meeting.]
c. Community Planning & Resiliency Division [Chris Mason, Director]
Mr. Mason reported.
• Mr. French asked him to provide an update on hot topic news in the CRS (Community
Rating System) world and Lee County and tell you where Collier County stands.
• We worked with FEMA since the day after Hurricane Ian and had two meetings in-
house with FEMA representatives, one with the county manager and one with staff.
• Subsequent FEMA requests date back to June. They requested 1,200 permit record files
and we gave them to FEMA. That included 1,200 elevation certificates. They're
looking for compliance issues. There were no issues with that request.
• In December, they requested permit reports and elevation certificates, anything
permitting -related involving 133 properties they observed and thought work was going
on. We put together a 240-page professional report and they were good with that.
• That doesn't mean we're 100% in the clear, but we've complied with everything they
requested. If you read in the media or watched the Lee County commission meeting
today, Lee County had three different requests for additional information and did not
provide that, but Lee County is saying they did.
• Collier County complied 100% with every FEMA request. That doesn't mean it's the
end of this discussion, but we're prepared for anything and are 100% in lockstep with
what FEMA requested.
Mr. Mulhere thanked him for the update and said he saw what's occurring with Lee County
on the news. Does FEMA have an enforcement arm, people in the field driving around and
looking?
Mr. Mason responded:
• They do. They're often consultants FEMA contracted with to do that work through
different firms nationwide. They've had them in the community since right after Ian.
• He believes FEMA still has a presence in Fort Myers and the Lee County area. They
have a field office there now. He doesn't know if it's going to be a permanent field
office, but typically, going back to Hurricane Ian, with events like this, the paperwork
goes on for at least five years.
• The week before Ian, we were wrapping up Hurricane Irma paperwork and had a
FEMA representative here. A week later, Hurricane Ian happened, so things like this
have a long timeline.
• He wants to assure the DSAC that staff has done everything 100% in compliance with
FEMA and complied with every FEMA request.
• Mr. Mulhere said he read that FEMA was pulling Lee County's 25% discount.
Page 4 of 20
Packet Pg. 66
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
• Mr. Mason said unincorporated Lee County, Bonita Springs, Estero, and Cape Coral
are in jeopardy of losing their 25% discount. They're a Class 5 Community like us and
we enjoy that 25% discount. We have over 60,000 flood insurance policies enforced,
which equates to over $9 million of savings that stays in the community. With that
large number of policies, we are always committed to doing what we're required to do,
and there's been no oversight at all in this process as far as missing any variables.
Mr. Curl said he heard that after Ian, one of the municipalities made a determination to
increase the FEMA valuation on your house to go from the Lee County Property Appraiser to
market rate. Does that ring a bell? He's wondering if there's any cause and effect. Maybe this
is how they went down that rabbit hole?
Mr. Mason responded.
• No, what they're looking at is that Lee County suffered a lot of devastation.
• FEMA is looking at unpermitted permit work. That's where this stems from. He won't
judge them because they're dealing with a lot and are probably overwhelmed.
• What's concerning is that FEMA came down with really swift action without giving the
community any option or opportunity to remediate the situation.
• As Mr. Mulhere explained, senators such as Byron Donalds are getting involved now so
FEMA probably will back off and let them try to work it out and make good on it.
Chairman Varian asked where the cities of Naples and Marco Island fall. Was FEMA
involved in any of those?
Mr. Mason said no, their city staff handles that because they're separate jurisdictions. They
have their own separate community number. We often collaborate with the cities of Marco
Island, Everglades City, and Naples so if they were looking for help or a consultation, we
would help. They are separate from our operation. Everything we supplied FEMA involved
unincorporated Collier County.
d. Building Review & Permitting Division [Richard Long, Director]
Mr. Long reported:
• The floodplain group has 605 reviews pending. They're about 22 days out from when it
gets routed to them. That group is impacted by the flood map change and many people
phoning in and asking how it's going to affect their insurance, etc.
• We're trying to resource sideways so they can keep focused on building permits.
• Structural has 99 pending and are six days out.
• Residential has 181 pending and are seven days out.
• Plumbing & Gas have 174 pending and they're 7-8 days out.
• Mechanical & Electric doesn't show up because they're on track.
• Inspections still average above 1,000 a day.
Chairman Varian said when it comes to FEMA, if you have 600-plus permits in the queue,
they include my loth -floor condo kitchen that's tied up. Is there a way of getting help on that?
Mr. Long said we try to triage that and when our structural and residential employees are at a
good number, we have them jump in to help. The first thing they do is look for things that are
Page 5 of 20
Packet Pg. 67
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
no-brainers or don't even apply. We try to weed them out. Andy, the group supervisor, also
goes into that queue to weed that stuff out.
Chairman Varian said he keeps looking at the reviews and it's stuck.
Mr. Long said it's not stuck, it's in line.
Chairman Varian said when it's a loth floor, he thinks, really? How many of those are like
that within the 600-plus?
Mr. Long said they try to handle those.
e. Public Utilities Department [Drew Cody, Supervisor -Project Management]
Mr. Cody provided an update:
• One availability letter got misfiled and went four weeks without a response.
• Please don't wait four weeks to tell us we haven't gotten you something. We may have
lost it. It was a one-off.
f. Housing Policy & Economic Development [Cormac Giblin, Director]
Mr. Giblin provided a Live Local Act update:
• We received two new applications that are being routed for pre-app scheduling.
• They're very small commercial infill properties, one in the Bayshore Gateway Triangle
and one farther down on U.S. 41 East.
• Once they get in the process and see what their development standards are, they'll
probably wind up not being able to move forward.
Mr. McLean said a couple of weeks ago there was a seminar at Avow. How did that get
publicly noticed? He didn't find out about it until after it was over.
Mr. Giblin said it was a private meeting held by the Housing Alliance and the Community
Land Trust. They put together the invitation list.
g. GMD Transportation Engineering Division
[Lorraine Lantz, Manager -Transportation Services]
Ms. Lantz provided an access management project update:
• We spoke to you about what you wanted to include in that scope, so we're moving
forward with the scope. We expect to have that start next month.
• The other project we're working on is we're developing the scope and refining it for
Golden Gate Parkway, the congestion corridor study from east of Airport Road, where
the overpass touches down, to just west of Santa Barbara/Logan Boulevard. That's a
corridor study similar to the other corridor studies we've done on Pine Ridge and
Immokalee roads.
• We're working on the scope and coordinating it now and it probably will kick off
around June.
Mr. Mulhere said he noticed there were new flashing lights and significant pavement
markings on Golden Gate Parkway around the Moorings project, four or five buildings that are
seven or eight stories tall. It doesn't do any good and it's bumper -to -bumper traffic. If you
want to make a left in there, good luck. If you want to get out and make a right, good luck. Is
part of solving the congestion problem without widening? Are you looking at making it safer
with some signalization somewhere?
Page 6 of 20
Packet Pg. 68
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
Ms. Lantz said it would be looking at operations, what works better, but mostly at some major
intersections like Golden Gate and Livingston. There also are several intersections, including I-
75. We're looking at everything for capacity, safety, and operations.
Mr. Mulhere said it's rough for residents who live on those streets.
Vice Chair Foley asked for an update or opinion on how the light at Whippoorwill at Marbella
Lakes has been operating.
Ms. Lantz said it's open and operational, but she can have Jay or Tony get back to you.
Action Item: Jay or Tony will provide a report about how the light at Whippoorwill and
Marbella Lakes has been operating.
Mr. Curl said just north of the very last 90-degree roundabout, he drove through that
community one day and traffic was backed up into Whippoorwill because they couldn't get
into the community gate. Maybe there's a stacking issue or sometimes the gates simply go out
for lack of phone service. It was an issue because they were blocking the road.
Ms. Lantz said she'll bring that up to the traffic officers group.
h. Collier County Fire Review [Linda Naples]
• We did 508 building reviews, with an average of four days.
• We did 37 planning reviews, with an average three days.
• We have three inspector positions and one plan review position available that will be
advertised in about a month.
Mr. Mulhere said he noticed it says Collier County Fire Review, as opposed to Greater Naples
Fire Review.
Ms. Lantz said that's because there's an interlocal agreement between them.
Chairman Varian said Greater Naples always gives the report, but it's called Collier County
Fire Review.
It. North Collier Fire Review [Bryan Horbal, Captain]
(No report)
i. Operations & Regulatory Management Division — [Michael Stark, Director]
Mr. Stark provided the March report:
• We received 4,332 permit applications, with a fiscal year-to-date total of 22,983.
• 308 were related to Hurricane Ian.
• 1,510 (35%) were incomplete, requiring rework to ensure compliance with regulations
Staff resolved the incompletes through communication through the portal, emails,
phone calls, and walk-in assistance.
• Staff maintains an average one -day turnaround time for applications.
• The team continuously monitors the time to complete reports to ensure resolution of
permit intake process with our customers.
• 1,265 customers came to our business center and satellite offices.
• Staff answered 6,195 calls in our Call Center, with only 181 dropped calls.
Page 7 of 20
Packet Pg. 69
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
• There are 311 permits in routing. That means fees are paid and intake staff is working
through 471 permit applications.
• We met with the Productivity Committee a few weeks ago with several division
directors to talk through some fees and process improvements.
• He appreciates everybody's participation and is looking into several issues to bring
back to the DSAC, with other strategic team members. They're going to do
presentations based on some discussions we've had.
Chairman Varian asked about the status of the CityView update with added text messages,
numbers, etc. It's coming up in May. Is that on target?
Mr. Badge said we're getting ready to start testing for the new version, which will have the
update in it, this Saturday, April 6. If testing goes off well, we can get it fully certified. After
that, we're probably looking at delivery by the end of May or early June if everything goes
according to plan.
j. Zoning Division — [Mike Bosi, Director]
(No report)
6. New Business
a. Pending Legislation on Building Regulations [Rich Long]
Mr. Long reported.
• House Bill 267 has a lot of things that affect us, but not really. It looks pretty extensive.
• They're allowing us to provide an internship program to qualify inspectors and plan
reviewers. That's going to be part of the way you can get licensed to do what we do.
It's similar to a four-year internship program and it has to be state -approved.
• Doug, our deputy building official, applied and we are now a certified education service
for that program. He's putting together the four-year internship. You can take
somebody without hands-on hammering, educate them, and get them licensed. That
will help because we're having a hard time getting people to do what we do.
• The next change involved windows, doors, and garage doors, replacement of existing
single-family, two-family, and townhouse. They no longer need a design professional
involved. That's because of the new flood map so now some of those zones are more
extensive and require it but now they're taking that out. You still need to provide the
wind load, design pressures, and instructions at application.
• They also changed some things in the private provider statute. They've defined a
private provider firm, which the private provider used to be, as either a licensed
architect or a private provider firm that can be a business, an agent, or an entity that
hires licensed workers to provide that service. It's like a qualifier.
• They've changed where the private provider is supposed to give notice to the building
official within two days or the day before an inspection. The language now says the
private provider needs to give an approximate date and time for when the inspection
will be performed. It doesn't say you have to do it before you do the inspection, but
they left language that says you still have to give us the report within two days after you
perform the inspection.
• Now if a private provider is a licensed architect or engineer and they perform plan
review and they put their stamp and seal on the acknowledgment form and affidavit
Page 8 of 20
Packet Pg. 70
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
saying that they've performed the plan review and it meets the building code, we now
have 10 business days to issue that permit.
• They're also eliminating the fee owner from the process. Now the contractor can give
us the notice that he's hiring a private provider to perform inspections. It used to be that
the fee owner had to give us a form saying someone has been authorized and hired, but
now the fee owner doesn't have to do that.
Mr. McLean said it says 10 days to issue the permit but where we get hung up now is we
issued a letter, the letter goes out to say these plans have been reviewed by NOAA are
reviewing these plans, but then we're told that excludes planning, FEMA and fire. So is that 10
days building only, and we're still subject, or is that 10 days for the departments as a whole?
Mr. Long said if the submittal package is complete, which means a complete submittal
package is all entities have already been reviewed and signed off and approved.
Chairman Varian said it didn't change anything.
A discussion ensued and the following points were made:
• We're only allowed to audit four times. They went from four times a month to four
times a year to audit a private provider.
• We also need to put a process and a manual together that spells out how we're going to
do it, why we're going to do it, etc., so we're working on that.
• Audit means auditing and inspections.
• The more these companies get established, it seems like they're reviewing plans, and
then they come into the building department and they get re -reviewed just like a
standard set of plans.
• Mr. McLean advises his clients against them. Builders love them because they save
time in inspections, but it's not clear that they save time.
• The county does a pretty extensive plan review, even though a private provider has
reviewed it, but the county still has to verify all the zoning and floodplain requirements.
• The county is responsible for regulating the private provider industry.
• They revised all the time constraints for permitting and processing a permit by taking it
out of one section and putting it into another. All of the 10-day corrections went away
and now it's 30 business days when it used to be 30 calendar days.
• Buildings under 7,500 square feet are 30 business days, which includes single-family,
accessory structures, and others.
• For buildings greater than 7,500 square feet, you have 60 business days to do and it
includes some other things.
• It's 60 days for buildings that are multi -family, less than 50 units. They leave out the
high rise with 100 units so he assumes it goes back to what's already in there, 120 days.
• Then there's 12 business days, which we already do.
• Intake was changed to five business days.
• That's the big change, but it's not really going to change because the last House bill
that changed all of our time frames, it was 30 days, not 30 business days. Our setup is
designed for the maximum of 30 days, which is 42 business days. We're still trying to
keep to the 5-10 days, as we did years ago, but volume and staffing doesn't allow that.
• We're running 7-8 days on most, so it works pretty good.
Page 9 of 20
Packet Pg. 71
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
• The only thing we might have to change in CityView would be the five business days
for intake to verify that the original submittal is sufficient to move on to the review
phase. We're probably going to have to make some tweaks to stay on track.
• The failure is 10% per business day, but they left in all the things where the applicant
can agree to a longer period. That way he doesn't get denied and has to start all over
again. They left that language in so he doesn't know why they did all of that.
Chairman Varian asked if we will leave our application system the way it is or will we accept
or rewrite that section?
Mr. Long responded:
• We won't have to change that because most of the industry can't turn around stuff as
quick as they would like to.
• We don't have to give the 10% back if it's caused by the applicant. We track everything
in days so if you had 30 days and we had it for five, now we're past the 30 days and it's
moot. Technically, we should have kicked it out and made you start over. We don't do
any of that.
• We're in good shape for a lot of verbiage, cross -outs and underlines and new statute
language. He doesn't believe it changes things. It's written for other jurisdictions that
don't have anything in place and don't care, so they're trying to get their attention.
(Chairman Varian said they'll get it.)
• The last thing in the House bill involved unvented and vented attic spaces and how it
relates to energy efficiency. It gives direction to the Florida Building Commission to
look at that and make technical or other statements by December 31, 2024, and to
implement something next July.
• Eventually, we'll work it into a building code change.
• They're saying their opinion is that unvented attics with isocyanates and all that is good
for this environment here because you're not going to import moisture into the attic.
He'll rely on our structural guys to figure it out. We'll see what the building
commission puts in the building code for that.
• That was the biggest bill with a lot of changes in it.
• All the Senate Bill 812 information Jaime discussed references only what we do. We
already follow the state statute for processing master permits. We do have to put a
program together with her to address how we're going to accept these things. He
doesn't see the industry wanting to submit 75 or 50% of the buildings all at once in a
PUD. That doesn't make sense with the supply chain and labor force.
b. Collier County FY24 Water & Wastewater Impact Fee Study [Joseph Bellone, Director]
Mr. Bellone told the DSAC:
He thanked the subcommittee, Chris, Mario and Blair, for the time they took to go
through the report and the time they took with him on March 131h to go through this in
detail. It was a great meeting.
In the minutes, on page 28, Chairman Foley had some action items listed for me to go
through with the DSAC.
Subcommittee Chairman Foley asked that Mr. Bellone needs to provide the full DSAC
with the history of the impact fee, show the fluctuations and big swings in the market,
Page 10 of 20
Packet Pg. 72
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
given the time differences, and then what will be needed. You'll find that in your
packet on page 142, an Excel chart.
• On the left side of the chart, it starts in 2005. On Easter weekend 2000, the utility was
running out of water capacity and had to manage demand by reducing pressure. It
wasn't a good situation for a utility or community due to health and public safety
issues.
• In the early 2000s, we entered into the design phase for the facilities on the northeast, a
water plant, a water treatment facility and a wastewater reclamation facility. The impact
fees in that time frame were growing as we went through the designs.
• In 2008, for ordinance 2008-202, we had a high of $7,339 based on what we thought
those facilities would cost.
• As we continued design into 2008, we all know what happened that year and no one
was happy. As we started to review the plans, we asked the board to put them into
hibernation. Through the recession and until 2015-2016, they were declining and we
were representing the market conditions and the plans.
• We always look at a 10-year horizon for planning for the utility. We were removing
those plans and moving them further out.
• To our surprise, people wanted to come to Collier County and growth started to pick up
at a rapid pace. The last time we did this in 2009, impact fees started to increase again.
• In 2019, they were up to $6,696 for combined water and sewer.
• Blair wanted us to talk about where that leads us to today, what's needed, where are we
today compared to where were we when we were doing these initial plans.
• It begins with the AUIR and the AUIR planning. We're looking at population growth
and managing capacity.
• What's currently the Golden Gate Wastewater Plant, a 1.5 MGD (millions of gallons
per day) plant we acquired from FGUA, will become a regional plant. We'll add 4
MGD of wastewater treatment, which also will produce irrigation -quality water. We
expect to start construction in 2025 and be online in 2027.
• Next in line is a 4 MGD full wastewater -reclamation facility, which will be on the
northeast site, to the north and east of the new park. According to the AUIR,
construction will start in 2027 and it will be online in 2030.
• Also in the 10-year planning horizon is the Northeast Regional Water Treatment Plant,
a planned initial 10 MGD plant on the northeast site. Construction is set to start in 2030
and it will be online in 2033.
• The last time we added capacity to the utility system was our RO (reverse -osmosis)
plant at the South Water Treatment Plant. We added 8 MGD of RO treatment in
December 2004, and in January of 2007, we permitted to add the last 12 MGD to that.
That was 17 years ago and it's at a point where we need to do that now.
• Blair also asked him to discuss where the numbers come from and how we got to these
numbers.
• In the AUIR, there are two key charts in the report on pages 17-18 that talk about the
water capital -improvement program and the wastewater capital -improvement program.
• The way consultants do this is they take the entire capital improvement plan for all
capital improvements, whether they're repair and rehabilitation or expansion and
growth -related. Then they back out excluded expenditures, those that don't represent
expansion. Then they back out those that aren't considered system improvements. As
Page 11 of 20
Packet Pg. 73
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
we build those, those plants will retire over time and they back out some of that to get
to the net amount that's included in the impact -fee calculation.
• Table 3 is about water capital. Table 4 is wastewater and looks at capital expenditures
and the investment in capital for the utility over a 10-year period. It backs out anything
that's not expansion -related and then looks at only investments that are either
transmission for wastewater or only things that are the treatment itself.
• You start with all of it and then start excluding things that should not be included in the
impact -fee calculation. This went through our impact fee legal counsel at Nabors Giblin
& Nickerson to ensure that everything included in this is includable in an impact -fee
rate study and is legally defensible.
• What that does is the column that says estimated capital cost at the top of the page, they
exclude and take the adjustments. Footnote 2 says we are excluding these. They look at
only things that are treatment, including wastewater treatment and wastewater disposal,
which would include deep -injection wells.
• Then they look at anything that is transmission, so transmission force mains (not
gravity mains) that are part of the transmission system and those that are expansion -
related to come to a net capital that's included in the calculation. That's where those
numbers come from.
• In terms of impact fees and how the utility works and finances these expansions, we
collect impact fees at the time we pull the CO and there's no way a utility wants to wait
until the demand is there to have the capacity available. We've got to build the capacity
in advance of demand.
• How do you do that if we don't have the impact fees for that? He takes out a loan.
Generally, it's a bond and we go to the bond market for that. He first has to do a bond -
feasibility report, which looks at the bond cover and revenues, and the bond market
looks at all revenues the utility earns. No matter where the revenues come from, they
look at all of it to get their money.
• They'll look at user fees, impact fees and will say how much of that is available after
you pay your existing debt service and operating expenses. They look at margins and
say how much of that is available for any bond that you're trying to issue.
[Mr. Dunnavant left the meeting at 3: 59 p.m.]
[Mr. Valle joined the meeting at 3: 59 p.m.]
• They're looking at six years of history to ensure you've been able to do it, and then
they look at revenue projections and operating expenses for six years. We've just done
a user -rate study, so the information is available.
• Then they look at how much coverage we have and issue a report to say it's feasible to
do this for the utility. We then take that bond -feasibility report and we have a
surveillance call with our rating agencies, Fitch Ratings.
• Toward the end of the agenda packet are the Fitch ratings that came after that bond
feasibility report when we were about to issue the last bond in 2021.
• The bond -rating agency looks at revenue, defensibility, how favorable are your rates,
and how easily does your board adopt changes to ensure that the revenues are
sufficient. That's how they identify whether this is an AAA -rated utility. Then they
look at the margins and liquidity. Liquidity is how much debt you have compared to
Page 12 of 20
Packet Pg. 74
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
how much money you have. The more debt, the higher the leverage ratio. They're
looking for a low ratio. If you look at all the revenues coming in, net that's left, and the
debt that's available and the debt that you have, the lower the liquidity rate that you
have, the better the bond rating. That's what they look at.
They also look at favorable growth trends. They're also looking at the ability of the
utility to not only cover its debt, but to cover all its other issues, like repairing and
rehabilitating aging infrastructure that needs to be replaced. They look at that as a
growing customer base to ensure you have the financial stability to do that on a cash-
and-carry basis.
That's what is financially required to fund expansions. Because we've got to build the
capacity ahead of time, we've got to jump through financial hoops to ensure we have it.
Both the user rates and impact fee rates are critical to providing the revenues for that
debt coverage.
Ms. DeJohn asked if there were checks and balances to ensure user rates are adequate to
cover repair and rehabilitation.
Mr. Bellone responded:
• Yes, we've historically been able to cash and carry since he started here in 2003.
• We were hit with a substantial rehabilitation project, the headworks at the North
Wastewater Plant. It's getting pretty dilapidated. It's where all the wastewater comes in.
You need the headworks, a critical part of the plant treatment that handles all the pre-
screening of everything coming into the plant.
• It's a $58 million project, which hit him for a loop, but we it was included in the user -
rate study that we did, and the board approved that. It's fully funded now through user
rates.
• There's a Fitch surveillance call coming up and they've sent us a questionnaire. He and
Derek Johnson are working on the responses. They're asking a lot of questions, but
they're looking at rates.
Mr. Bellone continued his presentation:
• The chair also wanted him to talk to the DSAC about the fact that we're looking for a
substantial increase in the rates.
• The rates reflect current market conditions and current needs based on the AUIR.
• We look the 2024 AUIR to see if it's consistent. Is that demand still there for those
facilities? Do we need to pull any of those plants closer in? Does that northeast plant
have to come in online earlier than 2030? He may have to update a study.
• If the water plant gets pushed out beyond the 10-year planning horizon, that's
obviously a big wad. We can do an update again. He'd look at those things.
• That generally takes place in the summer and usually goes to the Planning Commission
in October or November and to the Board of County Commissioners in December.
• That would necessitate using January, February and March to do an impact -free update
and bring that to the board. Rather than waiting three years, that's something that we'll
look at in terms of the AUIR, as well as any change in the economic environment. If he
leaves here today and two days from now we go into a recession, you won't be happy,
but we're going to need to move some of these out of the 10-year planning horizon.
Page 13 of 20
Packet Pg. 75
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
That would probably necessitate another full impact -free rate study. Those are the
recommendations he'd have to answer the question about when we'd do the next
impact -free rate study and how we adjust it.
Chairman Varian asked if subcommittee members wanted to enlighten the full DSAC about
anything.
Vice Chair Foley, the subcommittee chair, told the DSAC.
• We talked about a lot more detail than a brief summary. The action items we listed that
Joe went through were important to talk about. We don't have to wait three years. We
can address these conditions. It gets more fluid than the history has been.
• Could you talk again about the multifamily side, how that's a more affordable issue?
That's important, too.
• We need to say you can look at a chart's numbers, but the 80% increase is paid for
primarily by impact fees with new residents entering the community.
• You touched on some of the history when we couldn't do flow tests, we didn't have any
pressure and the utility was inadequate to serve the community. That's important.
• As long as growth continues, we need to do a lot of these.
• We didn't address the multifamily issue today.
Mr. Bellone responded:
• It's in the agenda packet.
• On the residential side, it's based on demand of a typical three -quarter -inch meter for a
single-family home.
• Units that are 0 to 750 square feet get about one-third of the full charge.
• Units that are 751-1,500 square feet, that's roughly two-thirds of the fee.
• As we're trying to build for the community in terms of what it's demanding, our fee
schedule is geared to that and always has been.
• It's important as these fees get to these levels that we understand that we have breaks.
Mr. Curl said everyone loves the Live Local Act, but it probably sends shutters down your
spine. How do you account for units potentially coming online, maybe a glut of them coming
online quickly?
Mr. Bellone responded:
• The county keeps a checkbook of the available capacity and of everything that's built.
• We subtract from the available capacity, and then anything that's been approved but
hasn't been built yet and we take that into consideration to see how much capacity
we'd have if it's all built.
• That's called the checkbook and is included in the AUIR.
• If you want a copy, we can get that for you.
Mr. Mulhere said he doesn't have exact numbers, but the rate of growth has slowed down
over the past few years. He believes the information provided through BEBR (UF's Bureau of
Economic and Business Research) has shown it's 1.3%. That'll fluctuate and will pick up and
slow down a bit. Many new projects are coming online, so if there's still demand, you're
Page 14 of 20
Packet Pg. 76
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
going to see substantial demand from what's been approved but hasn't been built yet, if it
goes forward. It's thousands of units. Out east, about 12,000 new units, maybe more, are
coming online.
Mr. Bellone responded:
• Activity Center 9 alone between Great Wolf, Wine and the park will go to the South
Plant.
• The South Plant is not expandable. It's a small footprint. We need to relieve the South
Plant and move some of that. At the same time, we're envisioning the eventual septic -
to -sewer conversion in Golden Gate City.
Mr. Mulhere asked for the timeline of planning, design and permitting. How long does it take
to take a new regional plant from start to functional? Seven years?
Mr. Bellone responded:
• The design is about three. There are changes in permitting rules that may not have
been approved yet that could add some time. Permitting takes a good amount of time,
so it's probably in the six- to eight -year range to get it online.
• The good thing is a lot of that is already designed. Corollo designed the northeast
plants in 2008. We're now doing a redesign to make sure they're meeting new
technical standards.
• We're required to ensure we're removing PFAS, the chemicals that are hard to get rid
of. Reverse osmosis and membranes do that but lime softening does not. We've got tc
be careful about that.
• That's one of the questions that Fitch asked. How are you moving PFAS from the
water?
• The utility is addressing many things at the same time.
Mr. Mulhere noted that Fitch specializes in utility bonds but Moody's is not as specific.
Mr. Mitchell said based on the information at that meeting, he understands why there's such
a large increase. Nobody wants that, but we have a need for service and don't have the
infrastructure. Based on the subcommittee meeting, he understands why. This was boiled
down today but the subcommittee spent more than two hours going over it and he understands
why we're at that number.
Mr. Valle said we talked about all the issues related to affordability and where we are and
that's where we landed with the multi -family portion.
Mr. Bellone explained.
• That's where it's going to be much more beneficial in making that component. It's a
factor of where we are and the way the Florida legislature doesn't allow you to
segregate single-family homes by size anymore.
• When you look at construction costs, anything we looked at in 2019, you can take that
number today and double it. It's painful.
Page 15 of 20
Packet Pg. 77
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
• Moving forward, what we need to do is more regular and ongoing because he'd hate to
see a sudden big crunch. We need to be mindful about how we do studies moving
forward.
A discussion ensued and the following points were made:
• The current fee for a 1,000-square-foot multifamily unit is about $4,000 and as
proposed, it would be about $8,000.
• We're managing the impact on affordable housing.
• We probably have to consider how to subsidize the cost of impact fees for affordable
housing because we're getting more. There may be ways to subsidize that. You're not
waiving the impact fee, you're subsidizing it.
• The plan is to get these to the BCC for the first meeting in May, but we don't want the
board to get it all at once.
• The water and sewer impact fees are exempt from any of the rules in terms of
regulations, but the last time we did this, we waited 90 days to put it into effect.
• When the board approves it, we will wait 90 days before it goes into effect.
• Even if it's May, we have to advertise it and by the time he gets the resolution or the
ordinance, it's June, so it should go into effect in October 1, the new fiscal year.
• If you're building something and you started it a year ago and you don't have a CO yet,
and you get a CO in November, and these went into effect in October, you're paying
these fees. If you get your CO in September, you're paying the current fees.
Amy Patterson, County Manager, told the DSAC.
• The rates are set by building permit application date so everybody in process will be
locked in at the current rates.
• That would be when the permit is applied for, when the application comes in.
• Once a complete application is assigned a permit number, it's accepted at the rate at the
time of the application, so it provides protection.
• Once we start the 90-day window from board adoption, it gives people who may be
close to applying for building permits a chance to get permits in and lock in under the
old rates.
Mr. Mulhere said that usually prompts a crunch to get permits.
Ms. Patterson said when we experienced crunches, Community Development informs
applicants about what's needed to get a complete building permit application. They usually
have more hands on deck to receive permits because we're trying to facilitate as many people
as possible coming in under the wire who have been planning this. Obviously it's tough to
make room in their budgets for this increase so that's why the 90-day notice period and the
ability to get those permits in is incredibly important.
Mr. Valle said it's to help folks who were through the financing portion. We had folks in tears
at the county commission office who were saying their loan doesn't close for another two
weeks and you put this into effect today. If they don't close, they can't qualify for their house
anymore. People were on the edge and that was when it was still affordable, so the county has
Page 16 of 20
Packet Pg. 78
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
done a phenomenal job of letting folks know and ensuring they have a time frame, a published
date. The county gets the information out, telling them they have X amount of time to get it in.
Mr. English asked if other impact fees were scheduled to increase in the foreseeable future.
Ms. Patterson responded.
• That depends on what time frame you consider the foreseeable future.
• Utilities and transportation are fortunate and their fees have remained relatively current
compared to other fees, in part due to a couple of things. There were a couple of
administrative holds by prior administrations on impact fee increases or studies tied to
COVID and some other uncertainty in the economy.
• We also had a series of changes by the legislature, so we started the study now because
we know what the legislature has done and now we've got to make adjustments to our
process.
• Unfortunately, you get started with that and the next year they make more changes so
there have been four to five years of consecutive changes at the statutory level that
trickle down, affecting how the county administers the impact -fee program.
• We feel confident now that the impact fees in the study — all except for FHIR — will be
coming forward.
• The legislature has put significant constraints, other than utilities, on how we manage
impact -fee updates. Ties to phase -ins that are required on percentages of increase. If
you increase the fee, you're tied to a phase -in and then the phasing extends depending
on how large the increase is. There are abilities for the board to preempt that, however,
it's not likely that they won't accept the phase -in prescribed in statute.
• The definition of what we can spend on impact fees on has changed. For a library, it's
not just the library construction, as well as walls and the roof, it's everything it takes to
open — the books, furniture, fixtures, and equipment, everything it takes brand new to
open it up at one time. All of that's gone.
• For everything except for public safety and utilities, you are looking at vertical
construction only, site and vertical. No furniture, no fixtures, no equipment, no
vehicles. All the definitions have to change, as well as the structure of those studies.
• Now we're up against a time crunch from this legislative session, which is saying if
your study is in process, you have a year to get it done. We're probably grandfathered
in for at least this round, but there's a four-year look -back period for the data we can
include in the study. Sometimes that's good, sometimes that's bad.
• To answer your question, impact fee studies are working their way through the process
and the increases on those studies for many of the smaller fees are not going to be
anywhere near this. For the big fees, transportation, parks, and schools, schools is the
outlier for big fee increases. She doesn't know the school board's tolerance about
making a recommendation on a sizable increase in the school impact fee.
• Once we have documents, we'll get them to you before we schedule a subcommittee so
everyone can get their arms around it. It's going to be a group effort on how we manage
this going forward because of mandated phase -ins. Otherwise, it's going to be mass
chaos and trying to manage that for budgets, etc. We're going to have to think about
how we might approach fees and set up a cycle so it's predictable.
Page 17 of 20
Packet Pg. 79
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
• Indexing is gone, except for utilities. They used to buy a CPI or other adjustments used
to smooth out, increases or decreases. The legislature also wipes that out.
• Utilities was on the block this year to be brought in underneath all of these interesting
dynamics. They were able to escape this year. She doesn't know if it bodes well for
utilities next year. They may be doing the same thing with these strange data sets,
timing, etc., so we'll see where that goes.
Mr. Valle asked how that impacts overall the total general revenue budget because we've still
got to pay for that, right? Is that going to come out of general revenue? Where does that come
from?
Ms. Patterson responded.
• Absent this legislative piece, the idea that we could adopt less than a full fee is possible.
But it's new revenue coming, the infrastructure sales tax that just expired. We'll see
over the next 1'/2 years the appetite for bringing it back. Right now, that appetite is
minimal.
• The general fund is the other choice and has been used to help offset debt incurred for
capital facilities where the impact fees might have fallen short, when we had down
times. Competition for the general fund has taken on a new element with the rollback
so this is going to be a balancing act that will play out through the budget this year
through our priority -based budget, as well as when we look at the AUIR next year.
• She doesn't have answers because the actions the legislature took limit our ability to
pay for a full -growth project, limiting the ability to buy vehicles for the school district,
for growth vehicles, no replacements. We're talking straight growth. It doesn't make a
lot of sense, but the legislature felt strongly about this, other than public safety.
• We'll see what ramifications these have on capital budgets and what our options are to
balance that out because nobody living here wants to pay more taxes, and they
definitely don't want to pay for growth. It's a balancing act that the board's will have.
We have a $500 million shortfall in the capital plan between transportation and
stormwater, so no one knows what's going to happen there.
Mr. Valle asked Mr. Bellone what he needed.
Mr. Bellone said to accept the Water and Wastewater Impact -Fee Study, as delivered, so he
can present it to the board.
Vice Chair Foley made a motion to accept the Wastewater Impact Fee Study, as submitted.
Second by Mr. Valle. The motion passed unanimously, 11-0.
7. Old Business
a. Sidewalk Payment in Lieu Provisions [Jaime Cook]
Ms. Cook said there was a discussion at the last meeting about payments in lieu, where the
funds go and how they're allocated toward future projects, so she asked Trinity Scott to be
here to answer those questions because that's done by her team.
Ms. Scott told the DSAC.
The practice, which started in 2005, allocated them to road impact -fee districts because
it was an area that was consistent and didn't change.
Page 18 of 20
Packet Pg. 80
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
• Currently, when payment in lieu of funds go in, they go into a revenue account for that
road impact -fee district.
• To utilize them on a project, we go before the board and do a budget amendment to
move them into a project. They're used within the road impact -fee district they fall
within, or in an adjacent district. We were consistent about how we did things across-
the-board.
• Road impact -fee districts are static. There were early discussions about using
commission districts, but those change over time due to redistricting.
• We go to the board for every dollar we take out of those revenue accounts to put
toward projects.
Mr. Curl said the discussion last month involved Golden Gate Estates. Looking at the profile
of these lots, some are sideways fronting on a right-of-way, so their typical frontage might be
narrow, but the payment in lieu numbers were killing projects. That's why that discussion
started. There wasn't any question of where it went or how the fees were used.
Ms. Scott responded.
• She listened to last month's discussion and talked to Jaime afterward.
There is a provision in the code. In the instance that was brought up, the person was
coming in for a Site -Improvement Plan and had a code issue so the payment in lieu is
limited to 25% of the improvement. The improvement was $800 or $900 for shrubs so
the payment in lieu amount would have been limited to 25%.
There was something put in when Stan Chrzanowski and Russ Muller were here in the
2005-2006 time frame to address those issues when people came in for Site -
Improvement Plans. We were dealing with many issues in the Immokalee area and
trying to get them to come into some code compliance. We didn't want to overly
burden the project to where it would make it unattainable for them but allow them to
work toward compliance. That's why that 25% was in there.
Mr. Curl asked if it's 25% of the engineer's OPC (Opinion of Probable Cost).
Ms. Scott said correct.
Ms. Cook said it's in the fee schedule and also in LDC 6.06.02.C.2. Somebody's OPC was
less than $400, so their 25% is less than $100.
Mr. Mulhere said it's a code -driven issue. It's not expensive, but it has to go through a
process and 25% is low. If you're building a new building, it's not going to help.
8. Committee Member Comments
Mr. McLean noted that Clay isn't here because John Passidomo passed away today. He's a
giant in our industry, so put Clay and the Passidomo family in your thoughts and prayers, if
you want.
9. Adjourn
Future Meeting Dates:
3 p.m. May 1, 2024
3 p.m. June 5, 2024
3 p.m. July 3, 2024
Page 19 of 20
Packet Pg. 81
April 3, 2024
11.B.c
Mr. Curl made a motion to adjourn. Second by Mr. Mulhere. The motion passed
unanimously, 10-0.
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was
adjourned by the order of the chairman at 4:33 p.m.
COLLIER COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE
William Varian, Chairman
These minutes were approved by the Committee/Chairman on , as presented
(choose one) , or as amended
Page 20 of 20
Packet Pg. 82
11.B.d
ANTICIPATED UTILITY EXPANSION ..
j � r
Hogan Island mw
Town A
Brightshore
Village
Immokalee Road
Rural Village
SkySail
Rivergrass
Village
Town of Bii
Cypress
Bellmar
Village/
J
Imr
�a
I rfP'1 Z-FO -M.
IUMI V1
Ave
Maria
I
Oil Well RD 1'—
) * A
Horse Trials
L SRA
IIier Bounty
mp Keais
Ilier`iRand Gun Club
the Preserve
ColLie-r Count
y
Puhlic Utilities Department
nnN
/V
0 1 25. 5
Packet Pg. 83
11.B.e
ORDINANCE NO.2024 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER 74 OF
THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES (THE
COLLIER COUNTY CONSOLIDATED IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE)
BY INCORPORATING BY REFERENCE THE "WATER AND
WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE STUDY FOR COLLIER COUNTY
WATER -SEWER DISTRICT"; AMENDING THE WATER AND
WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE, WHICH
IS SCHEDULE TWO OF APPENDIX A, AS SET FORTH IN THE
IMPACT FEE UPDATE STUDY; PROVIDING FOR UPDATED
DEFINITIONS; PROVIDING FOR REQUIRED CHANGES TO THE
PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE ADOPTION OF IMPACT FEE
STUDIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH NEW STATUTORY
PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE COLLIER COUNTY CODE
OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES; AND PROVIDING FOR A DELAYED
EFFECTIVE DATE OF DECEMBER 1, 2024 FOR ALL FEE
INCREASES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 90-DAY NOTICE
REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN SECTION 163.31801(4)(d),
FLORIDA STATUTES.
WHEREAS, Collier County uses impact fees to supplement the funding of necessary
capital improvements required to provide public facilities to serve new population and related
development that is necessitated by growth in Collier County; and
WHEREAS, Collier County has used impact fees as a funding source for growth -related
capital improvements for various facilities since 1978; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2001, the Board of County Commissioners adopted Ordinance
No. 2001-13, the Collier County Consolidated Impact Fee Ordinance, repealing and superseding
all of the County's then existing impact fee regulations, and consolidating all of the County's
impact fee regulations into that one Ordinance, codified in Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code
of Laws and Ordinances (Code); and
WHEREAS, on December 10, 2019, the Board of County Commissioners adopted
Ordinance No. 2019-48 for the adoption of the Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study thereby
establishing the current Water and Wastewater Impact Fee rates;
WHEREAS, Collier County retained Raftelis, to complete the Water and Wastewater
Impact Fee Update Study; and
Underlined text is added; StFUCk '""""s^ text is deleted
Packet Pg. 84
11.B.e
WHEREAS, Raftelis has prepared the "Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study for
Collier County Water -Sewer District", dated January 19, 2024; and
WHEREAS, the "Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study for Collier County Water -
Sewer District" recommends changes to the rate schedules that provide for rate increases; and
WHEREAS, the proposed changes to the Water and Wastewater rates equitably distribute
the costs of acquiring public facilities based upon a rational nexus relating costs incurred by fee
payers to infrastructure impacts created by residential and non-residential land uses; and
WHEREAS, staff has thoroughly reviewed the calculations and findings and concurs with
the results of the calculations and the study; and
WHEREAS, the calculations and studies have also been reviewed by Collier County's
outside legal counsel of Nabors, Giblin & Nickerson, P.A.; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners adopts this
Ordinance to implement the recommended changes; and
WHEREAS, Section 163.31801, Florida Statutes, which is the Florida Impact Fee Act,
requires that the most recent and localized data be used in impact fee calculations and these studies
comply with that requirement; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 163.31801, Florida Statutes, all rate categories
that are increasing have a 90-day delayed effective date in accordance with the notice
requirements set forth in Section 163.31801(4)(d), Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the new definitions will also become effective in accordance with the 90-day
notice requirements; and
WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature adopted provisions related to the adoption and
collection of impact fees and therefore the requirements related to the adoption and payment of all
impact fees are being modified to comply with the new law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
SECTION ONE. Article I, General, Section 74-106, Adoption of impact fee studies, of the
Collier County Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; StFUA thFOUgh text is deleted
Page 2 of 14 Q '
Packet Pg. 85
11.B.e
Section 74-106. Adoption of impact fee studies.
The board hereby adopts and incorporates by reference the following studies with regard
to the respective public facilities:
* * * * * * * * * *
(2) Water and wastewater facilities: "Water and Wastewater Impact Fee Study for Collier
County Water -Sewer District" (dated September 12, 2019 January 19, 2024) prepared
by Public Rese r-ees >\a.,„,,gement Group, ine ,, pa Raftelis;
The foregoing studies are hereby adopted in their entirety, as well as any updates or
supplements thereto, including the assumptions, conclusions and findings in such studies and their
amendments. In accordance with the Florida Impact Fee Act, F.S. § 163.31801: (1) all updates or
supplements thereto, and any new studies, must be based on the most recent and localized data;
and (2) notice of the new or amended impact fee must be provided no less than 90 days before the
effective date of the ordinance or resolution imposing the new or amended impact fee; and 3) an
impact fee may be increased only pursuant to a plan for the imposition, collection, and use of the
increased impact fees which complies with F.S. § 163.31801.
SECTION TWO. Article I, General, Section 74-108, General definitions, of the Collier County
Code of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 74-108 — General definitions.
When used in this chapter, the following terms shall have the following meanings, unless
the context clearly indicates otherwise. Terms contained in article III or the rate schedules
supersede these general definitions to the extent of any conflict(s).
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11
Underlined text is added; StFUCIE through text is deleted
Page 3 of 14
roP0\
Packet Pg. 86
11.B.e
Impact fee study shall mean a report of the findings of research and analysis conducted to
develop fees assessed on new development that represent the fair share cost of the expansion of
public facility infrastructure made necessary by that new development. The report describes the
methodology used to develop the fees and presents the formulas, variables and data used as the
basis of the fees.
Infrastructure shall mean a fixed capital expenditure or fixed capital outlay, excluding the
cost of repairs or maintenance, associated with the cost construction, reconstruction, or
improvement of public facilities that have a life expectancy of at least 5 years; related land
acquisition, land improvement, design, engineering,and permitting costs; and other related
construction costs required to bring the public facility into service. The term also includes a fire
department vehicle, an emergency medical service vehicle, a sheriff's office vehicle, a school bus
as defined in F.S. § 1006.25, and the equipment necessary to outfit the vehicle or bus for its official
use.
Living area shall mean actual square footage of the housing unit. Excluded from the calculation of
the square footage are carports, attached garages, and porches that are not protected from weather.
Both finished and unfinished basements are to be included.
SECTION THREE. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-302, Special requirements for road impact fee, of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
. .
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; St•UA thFOUs,", text is deleted
Page 4of14
Packet Pg. 87
11.B.e
•
(g�(h}-Payment of road impact fees to obtain a certificate of adequate public facilities.
(1) A certificate of public facility adequacy (COA) shall be issued concurrent with the
approval of the next to occur final local development order. At the *""'e a ^ertifie to of
0
will be due and deposited into the applieable impaet fee trust fund. The r ,nds wi.1l-ch�14
be immediately available for- appr-epfiatien by the Board of Count), Commissioner-
^n eapital improvements and are nen rof •naa Final calculation of
impact fees due will be based on the intensity of development actually permitted for
construction and the impact fee schedule in effect at the time of the building permit(s)
application submittal, such that additional impact fees may be due prior to issuance of
a certificate of occupancy or certificate of completion for the building permit(s).
(2) Offsets for road impact fees assessed to building permits for impact fees paid in
accordance with this subsection, will be applied equally to units or square footage and
will run with the subject land.
(3) This provision is to be read in conjunction with Section 10.02.07 of the Collier County
Land Development Code. To the extent this provision conflicts with this or with any
other Collier County ordinance, rule or regulation, the provisions of this section shall
control.
(4) The provisions of this subsection apply to final local development orders approved
prior to July 1, 2019. Final local development orders -approved on or after July 1, 2019
are required to obtain a COA in accordance with the provisions of 10.02.07 of the
Collier County Land Development Code but are not required to pay road impact fees
to obtain the COA, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 163.31801(-2-",
Florida Statutes.
tW(i) Payment of road impact fees related to mines/commercial excavation.
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; StFUGIE *"now^", text is deleted
Page 5 of 14
Packet Pg. 88
11.B.e
(1) The payment of impact fees related to mines/commercial excavation may be paid
annually over a five-year period with the first payment due upon issuance of the
excavation permit for the subject site.
(2) The first payment shall be calculated based on the volume of material to be excavated,
as indicated on the excavation permit or site plan, times the adopted road impact fee rate
for mines/commercial excavation in effect at the time of the application for the
Conditional Use that was granted by the Board of County Commissioners, divided by
five. Materials utilized for on -site purposes shall not be included in the calculation as
they are not subject to the impact fee assessment. The remaining four payments shall be
due annually within 5 business days of the anniversary of the first payment date.
(3) Concurrent with the first payment, a temporary five-year certificate of public facility
adequacy (COA) will be issued for the proposed excavation site. Upon payment of the
full amount of impact fees calculated for the excavation permit the certificate will be
issued in perpetuity.
(4) Failure to submit payment in accordance with the provisions of this subsection will result
in the matter being referred to the Board of County Commissioners for review. Absent
the Board finding exceptional circumstances, the temporary certificate of public facility
adequacy (COA) shall be revoked. Revocation of the temporary certificate of public
facility adequacy shall also result in revocation of the excavation permit or site plan
approval for the subject site.
(5) At any time prior to the final payment and issuance of the certificate of public facility
adequacy (COA) in perpetuity, the applicant may provide documentation demonstrating
that the actual volume of material to be transported from the site is less than the permitted
amount. The documentation shall include signed and sealed volumetric drawings and
back-up information that justifies the reduction to the sole satisfaction of the County.
Upon approval by the county manager, the excavation permit or site plan will be modified
by the applicant in accordance with the revised volume of material to be transported on
the public roadway network. The impact fee calculation for the remaining payments will
also be revised to reflect the revised volume of material to be transported from the site.
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; StFuck through text is deleted
Page 6 of 14
Packet Pg. 89
11.B.e
SECTION FOUR. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-304, Special requirements for parks and recreation impact fee, of the Collier County Code of
Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
11111 Oil ..
.
.mo.
1.
11=0
SECTION FIVE. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-305, Special requirements for library impact fee, of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
oil i
. M-i
•
-11
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; 84U& thFOUgh text is deleted
Page 7 of 14
�t
Packet Pg. 90
11.B.e
SECTION SIX. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section 74-
306, Special requirements for emergency medical services impact fee, of the Collier County Code
of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
„_
MUT
. .
W-M.maw
. W W. Wo W
.
�...
R-
a 1--- M
SECTION SEVEN. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-307, Special requirements for educational facilities impact fee, of the Collier County Code of
Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
•
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/1 ] Underlined text is added; StFUGIE thFOUgh text is deleted
Page 8 of 14
Packet Pg. 91
11.B.e
SECTION EIGHT. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-308, Special requirements for correctional impact fee, of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
MEMETP-r- MMUTO
vilor.mm�.-M'..�m."-�.'I,.'."'�....
•
rZ
SECTION NINE. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section
74-309, Special requirements for fire impact fee, of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
M W r 9 TP-T-9 M MW WN I "M M
i%
Mr-WISUMM..
•
•.
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; StFUCk111FeE+gh text is deleted
Page 9 of 14
I'll
CW
Packet Pg. 92
11.B.e
SECTION TEN. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees, Section 74-
310, Special requirements for general government building impact fee, of the Collier County Code
of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
..,
.-; . .........
all
.
.
Mp
SECTION ELEVEN. Article III, Special Requirements for Specific Types of Impact Fees,
Section 74-311, Special requirements for law impact fee, of the Collier County Code of Laws and
Ordinances is hereby amended to read as follows:
NOW."M
.. - M.N.
jjiji -TERMI
IZ
SLIM
SECTION TWELVE. Appendix A, Schedule Two, of Chapter 74 of the Collier County Code
of Laws and Ordinances is hereby amended as set forth in the attachment to this Ordinance.
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; Stfuskthreug# text is deleted
Page 10 of 14
s_.
Packet Pg. 93
11.B.e
SECTION THIRTEEN. CONFLICT AND SEVERABILITY.
In the event this Ordinance conflicts with any other Ordinance of Collier County or other
applicable law, the more restrictive shall apply. If any phrase or portion of this Ordinance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions.
SECTION FOURTEEN. INCLUSION IN THE CODE OF LAWS AND ORDINANCES.
The provisions of this Ordinance shall be made a part of the Code of Laws and Ordinances
of Collier County, Florida. The sections of the Ordinance may be renumbered or re -lettered and
internal cross-references amended throughout to accomplish such, and the word "ordinance" may
be changed to "section," "article," or any other appropriate word.
SECTION FIFTEEN. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Ordinance shall be considered adopted upon the date written below and subject to
filing with the Florida Department of State; however, for administrative purposes the effective date
for all rate schedule increases and definitions shall be delayed to December 1, 2024 in accordance
with the notice requirements set forth in Section 163.31801(4)(d), Florida Statutes.
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; StFUG'i thFOUgh text is deleted
Pase 1 I of 14
Packet Pg. 94
11.B.e
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Collier
County, Florida, this day of
ATTEST:
Crystal K. Kinzel, Clerk
2024.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
By:
Deputy Clerk Chris Hall, Chairman
Approved as to form and legality:
Sally A. Ashkar
Assistant County Attorney
U '
Attachment: Appendix A — rate schedule
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; StFU& through text is deleted
Page 12 of 14
Packet Pg. 95
11.B.e
APPENDIX A
SCHEDULE TWO — EFFECTIVE a -,.ti 0 2029 November 1, 2024
WATER AND WASTEWATER IMPACT FEE RATE SCHEDULE
ERC = Equivalent Residential Connection
ADF = Average Daily Flow
RESIDENTIAL
- INDIVIDUALLY METERED
Living Space
ERC Factor
Basis of Fee
Water Impact
Wastewater
Meter Size
(Sq. Ft.)
Fee
Impact Fee
0 to 4,999
1
Per ERC (fixed
c2�
$3,314
3/4"
(And No More
at 1 ERC)
$6,470
5 614
Than 4 Toilets)
5,000 Or More
Varies
Per ERC
ERC value x
$3,314
Varies
(Or More Than
(minimum
(based on ADF
$3,382 $6,470
$5,614
(Reference
4 Toilets)
value of 1)
Formula)
(minimum
Meter Size
value c'�
Note)
6 470)
Meter Size
Meter size determined by the total fixture value connected to the meter and
Note
applying applicable provision in the current edition of the Florida Plumbing Code.
Reference the Meter Sizing Form.
ERC with ADF
When ADF is in Gallons Per Minute (GPM) then use the formula [(ADF-30)/30]+1
Formula
MULTI -FAMILY - MASTER METERED
Living Space (Sq.
Basis of Fee
ERC Factor
Water Impact
Wastewater
Ft.)
Fee
Impact Fee
0 to 750
Per Unit
0.33
2 135
c111,093 1 852
751 to 1,500
Per Unit
0.67
c2, 2 6 554 334
c2-,� 3 761
1,501 or More
Per Unit
1.0
1 c'� 6 470
3,3 14 5 614
Meter Size Note
Meter size determined by the total fixture value connected to the meter
and applying applicable provision in the current edition of the Florida
Plumbing Code. Reference the Meter Sizing Form.
[24-UFO-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; Struck through text is deleted
Page 13 of 14
Packet Pg. 96
11.B.e
NON-RESIDENTIAL
Type
Basis of Fee
All Non -Residential
Impact fees are determined by meter size. Water and/or wastewater
impact fees for alterations, expansions or replacements are imposed only if
the meter size is increased as a result of the alteration, expansion, or
replacement.
Meter Size
ERC Factor (1)
Water Impact Fee
Wastewater Impact
Fee
3/4 inch
1.00
c'� $6,470
c� 5 614
1 inch
1.67
$15,647 $10,804
4 9 375
1-1/2 inch
3.33
$4'� 21 545
$41;83-5- 18 694
2 inch
5.33
$18 O2-Fr 34,485
c,� 29 922
3 inch
15.00
$ 5 9,7-30-97 050
c^o� 84 210
4 inch
33.33
$4� , � 215 645
c�,� 187 114
6 inch
66.67
c"� 431 354"�
374 285
8 inch
116.67
$3-9 , 754 854
386,64.4 654 985
Meter Size Note
Meter size determined by the total fixture value connected to the meter
and applying applicable provision in the current edition of the Florida
Plumbing Code. Reference the Meter Sizing Form.
ERC Factors by Meter Size for Non -Residential Customers
Meter Size
Rated Capacity
(gallons per minute)
ERC
Factor [2]
3/4"
30
1.00
1"
50
1.67
1-1/2"
100
3.33
2"
160
5.33
3"
450
15.00
4"
1,000
33.33
6"
2,000
66.67
8"
3,500
116.67
[1] Based on the rated capacities per technical specifications of meters used by the county.
[2] Reflects rated hydraulic capacity of meter divided by 30 gallons per minute based on the rated capacity of smallest meter size.
124-U1:0-00148/1875387/11 Underlined text is added; Strue4,4hitough test is deleted
Page 14 of 14
M
LO
00
N
m
E
R
to
Q
jGPv ,
Packet Pg. 97
aa=l;aedwi aa;ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uoi;e;uasaad 00=1;aedwi aSMaa :;uewL43ej4v
4—j
U
L.
a--j
to
0
rC
W
Q
W
Q
WE
z
Q
or_
w
Q
i
m
N
O
N
LU
w
LL
N
W
0
N
i
o
Or-
o;
w
i
J
00
rn
Cb
a
r
a�
Y
V
R
a
99=11aedwl as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£59Z) 4JOLIS VZ-4�-90 uoi;e;uasaJd aa=I }aedwl dSMO3 :;uewLiOe}}d—
i
4--j
U
1
O
.V
_0
C�0
�
4�
Ca
C�
N
Q
4�
t�A
L
m
LL
U
D
'�
(A
C
CL
C6
u
E
C
m
ro
Q
Q
x
V)
i
LU
C)
Li
O
�
can
O
cz
�
�=
ca
a-
4)
�
—
O
w
:
a-
Lu
},
D
Q
J
Q
A
A
A
A
aa=l;aedwi aa;ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uoi;e;uasaad 00=1;aedwi aSMaa :;uewL43ej4v
Ln
Q)
4)
LL
(10
O
L
D
r
C
O
E
E
O
U
LL
V
C6
Q
E
O
C
O
U
Q�
V)
•E
m
o
o
N
>
u
U0
a�
V)
a�
M
a--+
. -
-0
=
00
-0
O
U
L
J
L
• U
+.'
fB
—0
C:
U
+-a
M
• —
(3)
.N
0-
-0
cn
P
D
E
0
O
.N
C6
E
Q
L
LU
z
�
o
�
�
°a
�
Q
�
�
Q
Q
U
a--+
to
�
�C
O
+j
O
oC
m
z
N
•U
E
O
+�
ca
+_,
0
.—
Q
•—
U
cn
=3
(�
—
U
U
O>
cn
WDC
<
L.L.
aad ;aedwi aa;ema;seM pue aa;eM
n�
W
U
L.
Z3
0
D
3
LL
W
V)
L
LPL
Q
L
4- j
4�
LU
Z)
A
ti£S8Z) VOLIS VZ-44-90 u0i;e;uas9ad aa=l;aedwi aSMaa :;uewt4oe;;y
�
N
�
—
p�
N
LL
},
N
p
_
O
O
N
V)
4--j
U
W
O
Q
Q
O
bA
U
�
N
O
4 -+
N
M
(/)
N
4-j
O
O
i
a--+
U
U
N
O
+
O
•ro
M
�
N
•�
�
O
�
00
N
+j
v
�
N
�
4-
p
-0
—
•�
E
U
i
O
_O
•N
ra
• U
x
i
i
C6
N
Q
�
Ln
E
•f6
•U
�
�O
cn
ra
},
i
U
C�0
N
U
N
L.L
O
V
>-
v
ro
"
�i
m
Q
�
Q
�i
r
O
r
a
m
m
a
aa=l;aedwi aa;ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 u0i;e;uas9ad 00=1;aedwi aSMaa :;uewL43ej4v
N
Ca
DC
O
.V)
ra
Q
W
�..L 0
4--j
U
Q •V
E
L.L
O O
Q) >.
D A
L
v7
V)
Q
(�
(U
C
O
>
L
ca
•
U
V)
No
�
•E
O
J
U
v
bn
aA
O
+-j
Q
D
v
O
m
L
4
N
aA
_0
C)
+J
O
L.L
U
J
O
U
(�
+�+
a--j
Ln
a)
N
O
�
Q
�'
�
=
N
p
4-J
ca
�
�C
O
4-J
ca
U
L
OC
DC
+,
�
4-1
.�
O
•`n
Q
L
O
o
.`�
=
°L
U
�
_
Ca
—
j
U
"j
CAA
U
-a
r
opp
O
+-+
0
O
ca
Q
Ln
>.
v�
L
U
w
L
ci
—
`�
ca
aa=l;aedwi aa;ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 u0i;e;uas9ad 00=1;aedwi aSMaa :;uewL43e;;y
a--+
Ul
a--+
E
L
Q
a--+
O
o
0
E
a�
. _
Ul)
N
>
N
>O
, uE
f6
ate-+
Ca
E
U
O
�O
C
ca
a--+
O
V
O
w
U
C6
EE
4--j
' E
t�A
aA
C6
�
4—j
ul
O
ca
Q
+�
_
4-j
H
_
ca
O
X
�
�
In
Q
LU
=
ro
u
U
v
s
NO
L
�
�
+�
M
O
O
cant
O
��
z
A
A
me
N
O
CL
M
O
a
m
m
a
99=11aedwl as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£59Z) 4JOLIS VZ-4�-90 uol;e;uasaJd aa=I }aedwl dSMO3 :;uewLiOe}}d—
v 1
4—j
W
E
W
Q
W ro
O
hh N
WlJ �
Q
Z3 a--+
U
Q
O
�V) -0
X v 00
w N
O ON
4
4-J W O
D A A
0
.E
01
M
r-I
II N
0
N —
s` �
0
.N
0 v�i
co
4-j w
U �
Q 0
U Z
+-j
� � c
O 0
�0 N
4-J v II
N ca 0
ro O
N
N U
� �
•�
v
E
-0 N C
p " 0
0 �
(7 j U
Li-
�
O
� � a
o (D _m
� � U
Q
M,
N
O
rq
' O
O
cu
O
Q
f�
E
+� c6
C6
N
0
C:
O
aj m
4-1
a--+
m
0O
J
.�
a)
—
E
U
0
N
L
� —
.C:
N
_0
cn
_
v
�
U
i
L
Z
0O
N
S N
ai
to
-0
a-J
•ca
a
�
�
L.L
—
C6
� E
U
C:
N
r
ro
N
`~
.0
Q
Lnn
L-
U
•E
0
co
Q
Ln
a.
-le
ra
U
0
ro
No
�•bD
4-J
'�
N
0
�
U
N
N
�
r-I
vi-
00
Q
to
11
C
aA
a- J
o
M
-cn.
W0
Q
II
E
X
_0
.L
O
N
O
cr
•-
_0
0
m
A
A
99=1;aedwi as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uoi;e;uasaJd 80=1 pedwi dSM33 :;uewLlOe}}d r
U
�
lL
a
U
N
.�aj
V)
,
�
LL
Go-0
O
O
N
M
4
c�
0
E
LO
0
a
m
m
a
99=1;aedwi as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uoi;e;uasaJd 80=1 pedwi dSM33 :;uewLlOe}}d F
C:
i
O
O
4-1
cu
bn
U
.�
f6
O
�•
0
v
aJ
N
N
L.L
cn
i
N
LL
QJ
t o m_
ru N
?�?����Noro
U
Q,
a�(jjN�
-C
iaj
a--J
S
(6
U
��
�°QN
cn
(a cli
LL
z
>
>
r
L
li
0
a
m
m
a
99=1;aedual as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uol;e;uasaJd 80=1 peduil (3SM33 :;uewLlOe};d
)
V
T
cz
W
E
O-J
a--+
n�
W
U
i
a--+
Ln
�
W
0
LU
Q
z<E
U
^,
VJ
L/i
OLL
co
2
U
}'
^0
0
a--+
�
cn
a
a--+
N
ca
W
L
},
rl
�
v
E
•C:
E
O
U
�
CU
�0�0
Ln
O
N
.0
;
ro `—
U
CL
0
99=1;aedwi as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uoi;e;uasaJd 80=1 pedwi (3SM33 :;uewLlOe}}d r
W
U
cz
C�
0
L
0
LL
v)
i
N
E
Q
Ca
N
N
E
N
Q
U
0
4A
cn
�X
N
N
0
L
Q
CB
0
m
L
N
c6
N
cn
c6
a�
ate-+
0
Q
.0
0
0
U
U
O
76
U
i
N
ro
ca
E
E
0
Ln
O
0
0
00
V)
O
Ln
�V
i
E
E
0
cr
.0
.E
rl
Qj
0
Ln
Ln
c6
'U
i
E
E
0
v
cr
O
O
l0
vi
0
r-I
tw
i
E
w
co
c6
'U
i
E
0
U
+j
N
cr
Ln
0
Ln
0
O
A
N
v
O
o
110
O
O
}'
4-J
�
ca
m
�Ln
U
LU
co
�--
Lj
0
-0
c6
H
ro
0
O
0
2
U
2
00
0
Cb
a
m
m
a
aa=l;aedwi aa;ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uoi;e;uasaad 00=1;aedwi aSMaa :;uauayae:
L
cn � C6
Cuz N O N Ln (L/)
� oZS -0 � � � cn � �
-0 V • � E c6
�
U c� � �
o •� N +-J
� �
Qz -I--ate-J V .
ro
> = V) �
v )
U = Q a) � o
o .� aA )
Z3 — — C >
U � ao cn +- � U 4—
(1) +, Z� ca ) O
C6 °C C Q >% O
41 O �— U O m
CL Q O to = u a)
E� E•� o•W a�o��
E _
°'
E Q,
.— a: un .—
99=1;aedwi as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uol;e;uasaJd 80=1 pedwi dSM33 :;uewLlOe}}d
^
v 11
nQ)
W
ro
4-J
W
V)
re
wo
99=1;aedwi as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uol;e;uasaJd 80=1 pedwi
dSM00 :;uewLlOe}}
b
O OUI
m O
Ql lD 0
rC4jE0 wOO
00O00
00 00
O M M
M N Lr)
q/} t/)- V)-
O
O qqT qqt
q;t Q0 O
lD Lr) N
/- 4j)- r-I
qA-
orn �
m m Q0
cYi
qj)-
L-
ca vca +-
MM
`
�
0
O�
ct
rC4jE0 wOO
00O00
00 00
O M M
M N Lr)
q/} t/)- V)-
O
O qqT qqt
q;t Q0 O
lD Lr) N
/- 4j)- r-I
qA-
orn �
m m Q0
cYi
qj)-
L-
ca vca +-
MM
`
�
0
O�
ct
O
O qqT qqt
q;t Q0 O
lD Lr) N
/- 4j)- r-I
qA-
orn �
m m Q0
cYi
qj)-
L-
ca vca +-
MM
`
�
0
O�
ct
orn �
m m Q0
cYi
qj)-
L-
ca vca +-
MM
`
�
0
O�
ct
L-
ca vca +-
MM
`
�
0
O�
ct
MM
`
�
0
O�
ct
6
O
99=1;aedwi as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uol;e;uasaJd 80=1 }aedwi dSM33 :;uewLjoe}}d
N
i d
vv Q
S $ S z Y
o o LL
�� U d
N
U (�
N
0
co�
N � Cj
�
G
0 0
O uj
0
'n
0
O
?
2 -
r
`-)
� O
N
� CV
�
t}}
N
41
LL
g
8
s v
3
a�
N
N
0 0
0 0
0
0
A
N
i
41
l
0
N
L
b4 M
0
C
m
0
O
pco
M
00
• �
Tp
h
S
O
M^
M
pp
(+j
h
op
o
a
�n
i
�
W
g
O g
0
0
p
LO �
Om
O
V
O
CO
C
N
m
ch
V}
U
N
8g8
Q
co
r-N
co
CQ
rpi
E
N
m
_v
aD
°
U
0
a-
� U
0
C4
m
G
O
.y
N
C
ii
� - I
M � LLJ
M O
N
o-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C 0 C d C 0 C .
N
aa=l;aedwi aa;ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uoi;^eluasaa� d aa;aedwi aSMaa :;uewL43e;;y
W
— =3
O O O
O U U
U v '�
N ca '>
O Q L..N
O O •^ No Ln
+� >� N U
V) (3) N a10 }, r.4.• — O c6
> � - .> -a 0 E
O .E 0-0
m � � O
U V Q C)� U
• 1
EN N �►' O
4-j " " � M '� _0
°�' O Q u 4-1�
U .�
c6 � ca Z N
4— U O
O QL
_0
4-a O ca
N •0 O O O O
M
a
m
m
a
99=1;aedwi as}ema;seM pue aa;eM : ti£58Z) VOLIS VZ-W90 uoi;e;uasaJd 80=1 pedwi (3SM33 :;uewLlOe}}d F
a
m
m
a
O
V)
D
U
(A
O
op
V)
4�
u
11.B.g
DO BUSINESS WITH
A CSIA MEMBER TODAY
CBIA OFFICERS:
Cali Clardy, President
Refined Builders & Construction
Norm Gentry, Imm. Past President
BUILD, LLC
Dom Amico, President Elect
Agnoli, Barber & Brundage, Inc
JP Coleman, VP, CBIF President
JP Coleman Construction
Leroy Christiansen, Past Vice President
Assured Partners of Michigan
Tatiana Gust, Secretary
Elite Permits
Kevin Deardorff, Treasurer
Ceiba CPAs and Consultants LLC
CBIA BOARD OF DIRECTORS:
Robyn Bonaquist, B-Squared Advertising
Mike Bone, D.R. Horton
Jennifer Evans,
Home & Design Magazine
Kyle Fruth, Peninsula Construction
and Engineering
Marc Huling, Roetzel & Andress,
L.P.A.
Nick Kouloheras, CGU Homes
Mark Monastiero, UMI- The Source
Nick Radick, Knauf-Koenig Group
Matt Sellick, Stock Development
Lynne Stambouly, Sales & Marketing
Chair, Illuminated Design
Blanca Vasquez,
VCC Contracting, LLC
Kevin Woodward,
HarWood Homes, LLC
Ryan Benson, A Vernon Allen Builder
Ill f hba NA
C B /� HOME
!\ 9UII [JFRS Nd114N] ft il1itl0rt
of HamrBuiltlers
June 10, 2024
Honorable BCC Chair Hall and Commissioners Kowal, LoCastro,
McDaniel, Saunders:
We are writing to you on behalf of the Collier Building Industry
Association (CBIA) concerning the proposed 80.5% increase in water
and sewer impact fees which will be coming to you for a vote at an
upcoming June 2024 meeting.
While members of the Collier Building Industry Association understand
and support the premise for financing growing infrastructure needs, we
are concerned in the immediate added cost to construction for home
buyers that the proposed fees will require. As such, CBIA would request
your consideration for the following suggestions as you determine your
vote on the 80.5% increase in water and sewer impact fees:
-A 3-year phase -in approach to the proposed water and sewer impact
fee increase of 33 1 /3% each year.
-A review of the design standards for water/sewer plants as part of the
criteria for determining the needed increase in these impact fees.
Thank you in advance for your consideration of our input. Your
leadership and service to our community is most appreciated.
Sincerely,
c� - 94A-- f-�
Cali Clardy Amelia Vasquez
CBIA 2024 President Executive Officer
Collier Building Industry Association, Inc.
3200 Bailey Lane, Suite 110 1 Naples, FL 34105 1 (239) 436-6100
www.CBIA.net I www.SandDollarAwards.com
Packet Pg. 115