Loading...
CCPC Minutes 08/15/2024August 15, 2024 Page 1 of 21 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida August 15, 2024 LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Planning Commission, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 a.m., in REGULAR SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Edwin Fryer, Chairman Joe Schmitt, Vice Chair Robert L. Klucik, Jr. (attending remotely) Paul Shea Randy Sparrazza Chuck Schumacher ALSO PRESENT: Raymond V. Bellows, Zoning Manager Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning Director Derek Perry, County Attorney's Office ABSENT: Christopher T. Vernon Amy Lockhart, Collier County School Board Representative August 15, 2024 Page 2 of 21 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. BOSI: Chair, you have a live mic. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Mr. Bosi. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to all of you. This is the August 15, 2024, meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. We're glad to have you here. Uh-oh. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Reverberation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We're getting some feedback. Now we're not. Okay. Good. All right. So where we are is it's time to rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. (The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Secretary, please call the roll, sir. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Chairman Fryer? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Vice Chair Schmitt? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Secretary Shea is here. Commissioner Vernon is not here. Commissioner Klucik, are you on Zoom? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I am. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Let's quickly have a motion to allow him to participate. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Make a motion to allow Commissioner Klucik to participate by phone. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: (No verbal response.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Welcome to the meeting, Commissioner Klucik. Continue, please, Secretary. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Sparrazza? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Commissioner Schumacher? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Ms. Lockhart is not here. We have a quorum, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much, Secretary. Addenda to the agenda. Let's see. Before I call on Mr. Bellows, we've got two companions that were scheduled for today. They're requesting to be continued to September 20. They are PL20220005195, the Hope Home Small-Scale Growth Management Plan amendment, and PL20220005096, the Hope Home II community facilities PUDZ. So I would like to ask staff to briefly explain to us why the continuance -- who requested it and why it was -- why it's being requested to be continued. August 15, 2024 Page 3 of 21 MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director. Yes, Chair. We received a notification from the applicant that they had forgotten to coordinate with the sign company, and the sign was not put up within the proper time period prior to the Planning Commission meeting. And so they had to request a continuance to the following meeting on September 20th. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. The only concern I have about that is that we are really already jammed up on September 20. And I know that we might possibly get to it -- if we put it first, we'll certainly get to it -- but then the other matters, something may have to be carried forward. But in any event, that's what's before us now for action. Any discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, is there a motion? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I make a motion to approve as requested or presented by staff to postpone till the 20th. CHAIRMAN FRYER: To the date-certain, okay. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: To the date-certain. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Further discussion? If not, all those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: (No verbal response.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passes unanimously. They are continued to that date-certain. Planning Commission absences, our next meeting is not until -- MR. BELLOWS: Mr. Chairman, we do have a change. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I'm sorry. I forgot to call on you. Go ahead, Mr. Bellows. MR. BELLOWS: We would like to add an item under 9A11 under new business, a discussion on workshops. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, of course, yeah. And that has to do with an interest that has been expressed, I believe, by Commissioner Sparrazza, something that we have done in the past. And the idea is set forth on a piece of paper that was circulated to us. We'll take it up on new business. And I'll just ask -- without objection, we'll put that on the agenda as new business. There being no objection, it's added as new business. Thank you. I'm sorry, Mr. Bellows. Then we go to Planning Commission absences. Our next meeting isn't until September 20. We've got, I think, about five and a half weeks to prepare for what will be a long meeting, so we may need it. Now, please note that this meeting is going to be on a Friday because Thursday, the 19th, which would ordinarily be our meeting date, has been preempted by the Board of County Commissioners. I think they're having their second of two budget workshops; is that correct Mr. Bosi? MR. BOSI: That's correct. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. So it's Friday, the 20th. And my question, does anyone know if he or she cannot be attending that Planning Commission meeting? (No response.) August 15, 2024 Page 4 of 21 CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, it would appear we would have a quorum. That's good. Then the meeting after that will take place on October 3rd, 2024. Anyone know if he or she cannot be in attendance at this meeting? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: At this time, I will not be able to attend. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you for giving us the heads-up. Anyone else? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'll check the calendar here a minute. Is it the twenty -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: The 3rd of October. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I'll be here. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay, good. All right. Looks like -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes, Mr. Klucik. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: I believe that two of us, our terms are expiring, although I'm not sure -- you know, I don't think I'll be here after October 1st. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay, sir. Thank you for -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: And I think, that might be the case as well -- COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Chris, right? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner, and also -- COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: So having a quorum -- having a quorum might be a little bit more difficult. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Understood. Yeah. Understood. Thank you for bringing that to our attention, Commissioner Klucik. Approval of minutes, we have one set for action today, and those are our minutes of July 18, 2024. Any corrections, additions, substitutions? If not, any discussions? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, I'd entertain a motion. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Motion to approve. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor of approving that set of minutes, please say aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: (No verbal response.) COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passes unanimously. Thank you very much. BCC report/recaps, Mr. Bellows? MR. BELLOWS: Good morning. At the last Board of County Commissioners meeting last Tuesday, there were no zoning land-use items presented. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, sir. Chairman's report, none today. Consent agenda, none today. ***Public hearings. We will go to advertised hearings. The first today to be heard are August 15, 2024 Page 5 of 21 companions, and they are PL20230018187, the Immokalee Road Estates Commercial Subdistrict Small-Scale Growth Management Plan amendment, and PL2020017803, the BCHD 1 CPUD, Commercial PUDA. All those wishing to testify in this matter, please rise to be sworn in by the court reporter. THE COURT REPORTER: Do you swear or affirm the testimony you will give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? (The speakers were duly sworn and indicated in the affirmative.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Ex parte disclosures starting with Secretary Shea, please. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Staff materials only. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Public -- matters of public record, a meeting with staff, and a communication of sorts with the applicant. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Staff materials only. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Staff materials and a conversation with Noel Davies. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Staff materials and a conversation with Mr. Davis. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And I said -- oh, and Commissioner Klucik? COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Nothing. Nothing except staff materials and a meeting. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I said "communication of sorts" because we communicated in attempting to find a time when we could communicate but did not, alas, actually communicate on substantive matters. All right. Having cleared those hurdles, we'll begin with the applicant's presentation. The Chair recognizes Mr. Davies. MR. DAVIES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Planning Commissioners. For the record, Noel Davies with the law firm of Davies Duke on behalf of the applicant, BCHD Partners 1, LLC, which is an affiliate of Barron Collier Companies. Chris Scott with Peninsula Engineering is also here this morning, as well as Norman Trebilcock, our transportation engineer. I'm going to turn it over to Chris shortly. Before I do that, I'd like to provide a brief history. Here is the subject property. We are on the west side of the intersection of Immokalee Road and Orange Tree Boulevard. And this is our third time before you on this specific site. On the first go-round back in 2021, we were approved for 200,000 square feet of commercial uses, C-1 through C-3 uses, plus a handful of others, including self-storage. Round 2, which was last year, we were approved for 130,000 square feet of self-storage only plus 100,000 square feet of commercial uses. That was a less intense group of uses. So we reduced the trip cap in accordance with that corresponding decrease in intensity. Today is Round 3. The market for self-storage may be softening a bit. It's hard to tell at this point, so we're seeking 130,000 square feet of commercial uses instead of the 100,000 we currently have and also to add indoor golf cart sales as a use, but we would like to keep the option for 130,000 square feet of self-storage based on ever-evolving market conditions; however, and importantly, we are not seeking to increase the trip cap. So that reduced trip cap from Round 2 will remain, but we would have the flexibility to do either commercial only, for example, at 130,000 square feet, i.e. no self-storage at all, or some combination of commercial and self-storage. Under all circumstances, we are still maxed out at that lower trip cap from our last approval, and that ensures -- CHAIRMAN FRYER: And that number's 475, correct? MR. DAVIES: Correct. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. DAVIES: Four seven-five two-way p.m. peak-hour trips. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. DAVIES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So the trip cap not moving will ensure that even though on paper we will have an August 15, 2024 Page 6 of 21 additional 30,000 square feet of commercial, this is definitionally not an increase in intensity. And the gatekeeper, of course, for that is your county staff, should this be approved. Our next step would be going through the SDP process. At SDP application, we're required to submit updated Transportation Impact Statements, including detailed trip generation analysis for each specific use, and the aggregate of our trips for this site has to remain under that reduced trip gap from our last approval. And with that, I'm going to invite Mr. Scott up to give the remainder of our presentation. Thank you very much, Planning Commissioners. I'm happy to answer questions now or at the end of Mr. Scott's remarks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Just for the record, I did make a site visit, under disclosures. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Before you step down, Mr. Davies -- MR. DAVIES: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: -- I would like you to, if you wouldn't mind -- I think I know the answer to this question, but I want to make a record. The rectangle to the west, the narrow rectangle, it leads up to 4th Street Northeast. Would you please bring us up to date on that? And I'm particularly interested in the ingress and egress, of course. MR. DAVIES: Do you want to address that? Mr. Scott will address your remarks. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. That's fine, too. MR. DAVIES: Thank you, sir. MR. SCOTT: For the record, Chris Scott, planning manager with Peninsula Engineering. Mr. Chairman, I believe you're referring to this rectangle piece? CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yes. MR. SCOTT: Yeah. Nothing has changed with that. That piece was left as open space on the master plan. As you can see here, there was an -- the only interconnection that could take place there would be for the adjacent property owner to the north. I believe that property has actually been transferred to their ownership. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I believe it has, too. And that's the record I wanted to make, that there -- that there may -- if you don't mind, I'm going to ask Mr. Bosi to clarify exactly what the status of that parcel is with respect to the ingress and egress. Because when we heard this last, in 2023, we insisted that there be no ingress and egress for the commercial activities and that was -- that was part of the deal. So I want to be sure that that remains part of the deal. MR. BOSI: That is staff's understanding of the PUD and how it reads that, for commercial purposes, that it's not provided for an ingress point. MR. SCOTT: Just to summarize. Yeah, there is no commercial ingress/egress onto 4th through the PUD. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We had had a number of homeowners last time around who were concerned about that, and I just wanted to be sure that there was to be no change, and you're reassuring us that there is not. MR. SCOTT: That is correct. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. COMMISSIONER SHEA: What does that arrow mean, connecting the two lots -- MR. SCOTT: That is if the -- there is a provision within the PUD that if the adjacent owner were to purchase it, they would be allowed to put a driveway access to access their combined properties. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And we believe that's happened. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. MR. SCOTT: And that property has transferred. And I don't know -- the Femels (phonetic) are their names. I do not know if they have built a driveway through it or are accessing August 15, 2024 Page 7 of 21 it, but they don't have ownership of that property. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And I looked at the paperwork from -- was it 2021 or 2023 when that was established? MR. BOSI: 2021. CHAIRMAN FRYER: 2021. And, indeed, this is all -- this was provided for in advance. In other words, the residential ingress and egress under these circumstances was allowed back then, and there's been no change to that. Sorry to interrupt, sir. Go ahead. MR. SCOTT: Not a problem. So this is the Master Concept Plan. There are no changes proposed to the plan. This amendment, as mentioned, is strictly to allow the development to better realize or react to different market conditions. So initially, as Noel gave a good summary of the approvals that were there, it was 200,000 square feet of any of the approved uses. When the amendment in 2023 came forward, there was an addition of some acreage, and the uses were somewhat segregated so that the commercial floor area and indoor self-storage area were reviewed separately in the corresponding reduction in trip cap. By breaking those out, we somewhat painted ourselves in a corner thinking that self-storage was going to be there, because at the time there was an approved Site Development Plan for a self-storage use, and that is somewhat teetering as to whether it would be developed. So the development team was looking at if we are not doing self-storage, are we going to have enough commercial square footage for this large parcel, and this amendment is coming in to allow for an additional 30,000 square feet of commercial. It does not change the location of commercial development or where it would take place or the access points onto the public streets. It does not change any of the development standards, and most importantly, I think, is it does not increase the approved trip cap. This is illustrative of anticipated development. So there is an existing McDonald's that is already open. That's the first commercial enterprise that is opened right on the south side of Orange Tree, or at the intersection of Orange Tree and Immokalee. Two properties have sold. So Tract A was conveyed to NCH medical. They have an agreement to allow for up to 25,000 square feet of medical office. Tract C is currently owned by Healthcare Network for more medical clinic space, anticipated to be around 20,000 square feet. And then the Winchester shopping center to the north, it's Tracts E and F, that has been approved. That's a shopping center with a total of 40,000 square feet. Disregard the imagery. If you see ghost images down there, that doesn't reflect the approved site plan. But it is 40,000 square feet anchored by an Ace Hardware. It will have space for other restaurants and service uses and office. And that really left Tract B where there was an SDP approved for 130,000 indoor self-storage facility. As mentioned, the market conditions have softened in regards to self-storage, and it was -- it is unclear if that will move forward. So for options, we had Trebilcock Consulting Services -- and Norm is here -- run different scenarios for different types of uses to see what could be put on there while maintaining that trip cap. So some of those would be a mix of office and medical, up to 40,000 maybe fitness or a larger sit-down restaurant. Staff has reviewed both the Growth Management Plan amendment and the PUD amendment, have found them sufficient both with the Collier County Growth Management Plan, the Land Development Code, as well as Florida Statutes. And they are recommending that the Planning Commission forward the GMPA petition with a recommendation to approve, adopt, and transmit to Florida Department of Commerce, and they're recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval on the PUD amendment. With that, I will close my presentation, and if you have any questions for myself, Noel, or Norm, we're happy to answer those. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Planning Commissioners? No one's signaling at this point. August 15, 2024 Page 8 of 21 Anyone want to be heard? Vice Chair. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. For use, we did get an e-mail concerning the sale of the golf carts, but also they implied that it may include ATVs. Is that included in the golf cart sales? I don't know why this person was concerned about ATVs, because they would still have to remain under the trip cap. But I guess, for the record, could you clarify? COMMISSIONER SHEA: They were worried about it running across the property and in the back looking for an area to practice. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: To practice, and ATVs running around out there. MR. DAVIES: That's not the intent. "Golf cart" means golf cart. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Indoor? MR. DAVIES: Yes, and all limited to indoor. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you. MR. SCOTT: Indoor retail. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Anyone else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, we'll turn it over to staff. MR. BOSI: Thank you, Chair. Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director. As the applicant had indicated, both on the Growth Management Plan and the PUD, staff is recommending approval. We recognize that this is not an increase within an intensity that's associated with this existing commercial development. It's just a response to provide for better market flexibility based upon the demands that ultimately are going to be yielded against this property and the overall needs of the community. So in that regard, staff is recommending approval. And I was encouraged to see, and I appreciate the applicant pointing out a number of the different uses that have already been developed, the McDonald's in the shopping plaza anchored by a hardware store, Ace Hardware. We think that these are the efforts that we're trying to promote to allow for the reduction within the trip length associated with the households within the Estates community having to gain goods and services, and the closer proximity that those goods and services are to those individual households only benefits that overall mission of the Planning department as well as the Transportation department of trying to really reduce trip lengths. That's the key to managing traffic within Collier County is trying to provide for the shortest trip length to be able to satisfy the needs of the individual household, and we think that this provides for more flexibility and ultimately will help accomplish that mission. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you very much. Any questions for staff or comments? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, we'll turn to public speakers. MR. SABO: Mr. Chairman, there are no registered public speakers for this item. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Anyone who is not registered but is present in the room and wishes to be heard, please raise your hand. (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Seeing no hands raised, we will close the public comment segment of this proceeding and take the matter in our hands for deliberation and action. Who would like to be heard? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Chair, I make a motion to approve. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you, Commissioner Schumacher. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Is this for both items? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Both items. Sorry. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. And there is no EAC approval required. August 15, 2024 Page 9 of 21 COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I second the motion. CHAIRMAN FRYER: It's been moved and seconded to approve as submitted. And the only thing I will say is that to me what was determinative is that the trip cap stays where it is at 475, which was an entitlement coming into these proceedings. So that -- that and the consistency with what's going on near the Randall Curve these days is -- oh, and also if one looks at commercial needs analysis, which one always should for our Growth Management Plan amendment involving commercial, this action has been taken because of a concern that there may not be sufficient need for more self-storage. So this is in keeping with the commercial needs of that area of the community. Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. Just for clarity, Mike, since you do have a letter in opposition, or an e-mail in opposition, this will not go on the consent agenda for the Board, or will it? MR. BOSI: I'm going to speak with the County Attorney's Office. The concern was commercial creep. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right. MR. BOSI: And this is not commercial creep. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Right. MR. BOSI: This is an existing commercial establishment. This is just an allowance for an alternative between self-storage, which is an allowed use, and the commercial uses already allowed within the -- within the PUD with the addition of the indoor golf carts. So I'm not -- I don't believe -- I think the clarification that this isn't commercial creep would allow for this to go on summary because there is no -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I would only recommend, then -- because I think Nancy forwarded us the e-mail -- somebody just respond to the person and say -- MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- "appreciate your concern. Here's the issue. This is not going to happen," as I've put on the record, regarding the ATVs, and that is not -- it is not -- they will still have to stay within the trip cap. Okay. Thanks. MR. BOSI: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, the motion and second is on both the Growth Management Plan amendment and the CPUD amendment. All those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passes unanimously. Thank you, applicant and staff -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Chris, Noel, thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: -- staff, members of the public. MR. DAVIES: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. We're moving right along here. ***So next -- next we will hear PL20240008157. This is the proposed updated approval of residential building permits, Land Development Code amendment. The matter's purely August 15, 2024 Page 10 of 21 legislative in nature, no quasi-judicial companion; thus, no need for swearing in of witnesses or ex parte disclosures. You have the floor, sir. MR. JOHNSON: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, Commissioners, for the record, my name is Eric Johnson. I'm the LDC planning manager in the Zoning division. Today I have the privilege of introducing to you a Land Development Code amendment, PL20240008157. This Land Development Code amendment is being prompted by recent changes to the Florida Statutes, particularly Chapter 177.073, and that was approved by the Governor earlier this year and will become effective October 1st. It's staff's aspiration to introduce this amendment to the Board of County Commissioners prior to October 1st. I have a very brief PowerPoint presentation I'd like to give you, if that's okay. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Yes, it is. MR. JOHNSON: So as I mentioned, this is being prompted by the changes to the Florida Statutes which deals with plats. That -- Section 177.073 is known as the expedited approval of residential building permits before a final plat is recorded. This Land Development Code amendment is proposing changes to multiple sections of the LDC and companion Administrative Code amendment changes, which is in your packet as an exhibit. By no later than October 1st, 2024, it requires the county to update the building permit process so an applicant may request up to 50 percent of plan homes or the number of building permits that will be issued for a residential subdivision or a planned community before a final plat is recorded with the Clerk of the Circuit Court. Once the County Commission approves a final subdivision plat, this would allow a homebuilder or a developer to apply for and receive building permits for up to 50 percent of those lots. By 2027, that number goes up from 50 percent to 75 percent. This is applicable to our county. If a governing body has a program in place prior to July 1st, 2023, to expedite the building permit process, it only needs to update the program to approve an applicant's written application. Prior to July 1st, 2023, the county has been conducting an existing program. So what we'll -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: What can they do now in terms of percentage? MR. JOHNSON: There is no percentage for homes that could be -- it's like model homes. It's not homes that are eventually going to be -- well, I guess you could say a model home will be lived in. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Can they get permits for 50 percent of the homes that that -- MR. JOHNSON: No, not -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Is there something that says they can't? MR. JOHNSON: I'm hearing from Director Jaime Cook, yes, they cannot apply -- they cannot get permits for those, for homes other than a model home. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Okay. MR. JOHNSON: And so the Florida Statutes have changed, kind of compelling us to allow up to 50 percent and then eventually up to 75 percent. So the proposed LDC changes, we would rename the "optional preliminary subdivision plat" to "conceptual plat with deviations." You'll see that sprinkled throughout your document. This allows for deviations from design standards not elsewhere allowed. In LDC Section 10.02.04, we would rename the section to collectively be requirements for subdivision plats rather than preliminary and final subdivision plats. Florida Statutes 177.073 refers to a preliminary plat and a final plat. Since the county only has one submission to the Board for final plat, it will serve as the preliminary plat under the statute. And as I mentioned, this -- these changes would allow for an applicant to identify up to 50 percent of the plan homes or number of building permits that may be issued for a -- before a final plat is recorded with this Clerk of the Circuit Court. The idea is that the plat -- and I didn't mention this before, the plat would be approved by August 15, 2024 Page 11 of 21 the Board of County Commissioners, and then the developer can apply for the -- apply for and receive building permits prior to recordation of the plat. So in Section 10.02.04.B.4.D, it would read -- and this is on Page 26 of the LDC amendment, Packet Page 482 -- "After Board approval of the final subdivision plat, building permits may be issued for a percentage of plan homes in accordance with the Florida Building Code and pursuant to Florida Statutes 177.073. Subdivision performance security shall be in accordance with LDC Section 10.02.04.F, as in foxtrot, 3, lowercase b, as in bravo, and then i -- lower case i as in India, and the construction and maintenance agreement shall be in accordance with LDC Section 10.02.04.F, as in foxtrot, 3, and then lowercase e, as in echo, when utilizing Florida Statutes 177.073." We did not stipulate 50 percent or 75 percent. We just are referring to the Florida statutes so that way we wouldn't have to make a change in 2027. Finally, in LDC Section 10 -- not finally, but in 10.02.04.F.3.e, we'd retain the existing first sentence without any change and modify the last sentence. And the whole -- the sentence would read, "This agreement shall be submitted with the final subdivision plat for review and approval and shall be executed by all parties at the time of Board approval if building permits are issued when utilizing Florida Statutes 177.073 or at the time of recording of the final plat." And that's on Page 30, which is your Packet Page 46. Finally, this would also change parts of the administrative code, the contents portion, Chapter 5 subdivision procedures, as well as Chapter 12 acronyms. So staff is recommending -- or staff is seeking your recommendation of approval for PL20240008157, which includes the changes to the Administrative Code. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Eric, I have several questions. I mean, this is pretty straightforward, and I understand clearly what the intent is, but let's go back to what was actually done. At one time we used to allow early work authorizations. You could get -- if you had a plat or a plan, you could get an early work authorization. It was nowhere near 50 percent, but anybody could always come in and ask for an early work. So what is different? MS. COOK: Jaime Cook, your director of Development Review at Growth Management. So the early work authorization, Commissioner, only allows for site work: Clearing, grading, those sorts of things. It doesn't actually allow for the construction of the homes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It's not allowed to go vertically. MS. COOK: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: All right. Simple terms, Joe Tentpag English, what are we really saving? Weeks? Months? Or years? MS. COOK: Up to a year and a half. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Really? MS. COOK: Yes. So once the subdivision plat is recorded by -- or is approved by the Board, the applicant has 18 months to actually go record that plat -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. MS. COOK: -- before -- right now they can't get a building permit until that occurs. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Till they -- till the plat is recorded? MS. COOK: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: And so this is going to allow a developer to begin to build homes. Now, will they be able to sell those homes and transfer? Because without a final plat, I'm kind of curious how they would do a site -- a homesite -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Survey. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: -- survey for transfer. MS. COOK: So they can enter into a contract with a buyer, but they cannot obtain a TCO or a CO until the plat has been recorded. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So, fundamentally, all we're doing here is they're giving August 15, 2024 Page 12 of 21 them months to start construction and put homes on the market? MS. COOK: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: As far as staff's concerned -- I mean, the PPL at one time, I recall, was nothing more than the preliminary site layout, and it kind of defined how they were going to -- you know, define the preserves and the road network and some -- it didn't even -- usually didn't even have the road network. It just was a preliminary layout. This is now all eliminated. MS. COOK: So the -- I think what you're referring to was the old preliminary subdivision plat, the PSP process. The current PPL process has the roads laid out. It has the individual lots. It has where stormwater is. It has the specs for those -- the lakes, the slopes. It has the preserve locations. It has -- the current PPL process has everything. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: So the -- it's beneficial to the developer, which is what the intent was. MS. COOK: Correct. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: What is the impact on staff? MS. COOK: The only impact that staff is really going to have with this is we will have to track the building permits to ensure that they don't apply for or receive more than that 50 or 75 percent. We've already worked with our IT team at GMD and have worked through that process of how to be able to track this, and we'll be able to implement that by October 1st. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. I mean, CityView, you're going to do that. MS. COOK: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. On a large development, let's say 2-, 3-, 4,000 acres, they're developed in phases. Is it -- so it's 50 percent of only the area that's going to eventually be platted? MS. COOK: It will -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Not 50 percent of the total -- I don't know. Let's say one of the rural villages, they come in and they're going to build certain villages throughout -- throughout the community. It's only 50 percent of the intended area that's eventually going to be platted, not 50 percent of all the homes in the -- in the receiving area or in a PUD? MS. COOK: Correct. It will be 50 percent of that specific plat. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. All right. All questions answered. I mean, it's a state law. We have to comply. I just wanted to be clear as to what the intent was or how it -- the impact. Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. I want to perhaps -- if my understanding is correct -- and if it's not, please correct me if I'm wrong. But I believe that Tallahassee was acting to resolve problems in other counties -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. CHAIRMAN FRYER: -- not ours, where there were long, long delays taking place. Am I correct about that? MS. COOK: I would expect yes. Collier County has a very straightforward process that works both for the county staff as well as the developers. We do know that in other counties, they may go through several reviews or several hearings before they can actually get a subdivision plat approved. CHAIRMAN FRYER: So it's undoubtedly going to have more effect or other counties that have been slower to -- with respect to the approval process, correct? MS. COOK: Correct. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Thank you. All right. Anything else from staff on this? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Anything from the Planning Commission before we see about public comment? August 15, 2024 Page 13 of 21 (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Apparently not. Do we have any public comment? MR. SABO: Mr. Chairman, there are no registered public speakers. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Anyone who is in the room who hasn't registered but would like to be heard on this matter, please raise your hand. I see no hands rising, so we will close the public comment segment of this hearing and take the matter under consideration for deliberation and action. Planning Commission. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I make a motion to approve the LDC amendment, updated approval of residential building permits as presented by staff. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passes unanimously. Thank you very much, staff. All right. And we -- MS. COOK: I have one more. There's one more. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Go ahead. Wait. COMMISSIONER SHEA: She's doing the next one. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, I'm going to announce it, okay. Okay. The next one is 20240008157, and this is the proposed updated approval of residential building permits. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: No. This is the excavation. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh. COMMISSIONER SHEA: We just did that. That's the one we just did. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We sure did. You know something, I didn't copy this correctly. Give me that for a moment. COMMISSIONER SHEA: It's No. 4. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Oh, boy. ***All right. Next up is -- I don't see a PL in here. COMMISSIONER SHEA: This isn't. There's no PL in there. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Why don't you announce it for me then, Ms. Cook. MS. COOK: Jaime Cook, your director of Development Review. So 9A4 is -- goes along with the LDC amendments that you just heard for updating the building permit approval process for subdivision plats. Our excavation ordinance, which is in the Code of Laws, references developers being able to utilize the PSP, or the preliminary subdivision plat process, in order to obtain a development excavation permit. From what staff has seen in the past, we do not typically do a PSP for excavation -- for a development excavation, as they need to come in for a development excavation permit. So it is a August 15, 2024 Page 14 of 21 redundant requirement in our code that we're simply just trying to remove as we move forward with compliance with this new state statute. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Do we have a PL number? MS. COOK: We do not. CHAIRMAN FRYER: We do not. That's rather usual, is it not? MR. BOSI: It's -- Mike Bosi, Zoning director. It's unusual -- this is actually piggybacking on 9.3. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh. MR. BOSI: So it's interrelated to it, but it is a separate change to the ordinance, but it's a reaction because of 9.3. So it's kind of piggybacking on the PL number that's associated with 9.3, the residential building permits related to plats. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I make a motion to approve the amendment of Excavation Ordinance No. 04-55, as presented by staff. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Is there a second? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Second. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor, please say aye. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Aye. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Aye. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Aye. COMMISSIONER KLUCIK: Aye. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: It passes unanimously. Thank you, Ms. Cook. MS. COOK: Thank you. CHAIRMAN FRYER: And now -- COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Jaime, can I just ask one question of clarity? MS. COOK: Only if you don't change the vote. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: In the process, you can still do -- you can still do excavations. MS. COOK: Oh, absolutely, yes. They just -- all excavation permits require a separate excavation permit anyway. So the PSP that was referenced in the excavation ordinance is duplicative and unnecessary. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: That's what I thought this is. But you can still do -- I mean, if there's a fill -- you still -- you still have to -- this does not, in any way, circumvent any of the federal laws and requirements for filling of wetlands or any other issue. You still have to have all the proper state permits and federal permits before any of this work is executed. MS. COOK: Absolutely, yes, sir. They will still apply for their excavation permit, and prior to beginning any construction on site, they will have to provide any state and federal permits required. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Okay. Thank you. MS. COOK: Yep. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Now, has it been seconded? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Yes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay, thanks. August 15, 2024 Page 15 of 21 Now, for the purposes of specifying this, I think you mentioned a number. Was it 0455 or 2455? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: It was -- I thought I read the -- from the 0455; was that correct? COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yes. MR. BOSI: Correct. CHAIRMAN FRYER: So it's LDCA 0455? MR. BOSI: Yes. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yes. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. I'm still a little confused because ordinarily 04 would mean 2004, would it not? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: But it's the ordinance number, right? MR. BOSI: Yeah. That's the ordinance [sic] the LDC was amended. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, okay. All right. So it'll have -- it'll have a different number in the LDC? MR. BOSI: Correct. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. All right. Any further discussion? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: If not, all those in favor, please -- or have I voted already? COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: You did. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay, sorry. Pardon me. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: I just asked her a follow-on question. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Well, I got thrown for a loop here, so it's my bad, and I apologize. You don't give me a PL number, and I feel like -- I feel like I depend upon a teleprompter, and it stopped working, which is a bad feeling. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Oh, not going down that road. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Okay, Joe. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Yeah. Well, we've got one more thing, and that is a piece of new business. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah. I'm just packing up. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Okay. And I'm going to let Commissioner Sparrazza introduce this please. Commissioner? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you, sir, Chairman. ***I've had the pleasure of being on this committee for about 20 months now, 22 months, whatever it is. October 1st was my anniversary date. And it's come up in a handful of discussions here in the public former that "wouldn't it be great if we could get together and talk about something?" So I said, "Why don't we tentatively, say, let's have an open workshop between, shall we call it, all three of the bodies at hand here, the Planning Commissions, the Board of County Commissioners, and the county staff?" I thought that if we actually planned something three times a year spaced out every four months, if we have the need for these three bodies to get together and discuss something, we could. It's already on the schedule. If we don't have a need for all three or even two of the bodies to get together, then that portion of the meeting can be opened back up to whatever -- this happens to correlate with the CCPC meetings -- we could open it up for a longer CCPC meeting. But the whole idea was to allow a time that all three bodies got together and discussed something. That something could be right down to the details of the AIU -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: AUIR. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: AIUI, right? Something like that. COMMISSIONER SHEA: AUIR. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: AUI, right, right. Something like that. We've August 15, 2024 Page 16 of 21 always talked about, "Gee, maybe we should get together and talk about something," and we never really have. The other point is, because of Sunshine Laws and everything involved, we can't get together and talk about anything openly. I put this down as a quick idea, as a note to my fellow commissioners here, and would hope that if the idea has any type of traction at all, that we could improve upon this and, obviously, ask for staff's input and even the Board of County Commissioners, if this is something they would like. So that's what I've put forth for discussion. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Vice Chairman. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Yeah, Randy, back in my day when I was a Community Development administrator, as we used to call it back then, between myself and the Transportation administrator, we met a couple of times, maybe three times, with the Board, but they were -- we were tackling major issues: Concurrency, trip generation concurrency, and even at that time I believe we were even talking about moratoria in some of the issues. I remember one meeting we had, of course I was staff, but it was the Planning Commission and the planning commissioners. It was very productive. I think the second one probably wasn't so much. And I would -- we have to be careful here because it's taking time away from the Board as well from their duties. The real issue is it would really have to be structured and very definitive on what issues we want to address. But like I said, back then there were major issues. It was growth -- growth management, transportation concurrency, and other issues that this county was trying to go through. And, of course, the other issues with schedules related to AUIR, but road construction, capacity, either at the landfill or issues doing [sic] with -- with water and sewer. So I don't know. I would have to say if -- I would agree with it as long as it's something that would be of value and not just kind of a dog-and-pony show. It just has to be of some value and some purpose and intent. Otherwise, we, as Planning Commission -- and in the past we've done this as well. We actually met at Horseshoe for workshops, and that was just planning commissioner -- planning commissioners. It typically is not a meeting where we have a court reporter. It's just a -- they do a summary meeting, and we discuss issues at hand in regards to pretty much background, education, and to educate commissioners on certain aspects of the process, similar to what we discussed today, PPL and some other type of things. So it -- it would -- I think we'd have to be very definitive and outline what is our objective. And I guess I defer to staff what they think, because certainly Mike and Ray were back -- were part of the team back then as well. And I remember one worked out well. The other one, probably not so -- not so -- not so good. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thanks, Joe. If I can make a comment. What I was anticipating, and I didn't state it in my opening remarks, was throughout now, up till December or January, if there's topics that come up and we say, "You know what, that would be great to have a further detailed discussion on at a workshop, great, we have one scheduled for, for example, February 20th." If we go through our normal meetings and there are no topics that come up that would be applicable to have at a workshop like this, then the workshop doesn't take place. But just trying to keep in mind, geez, every four months, if we wanted to bring something up for discussion, we have a time and a date set up. If there's nothing on the agenda, the meeting is canceled. But I agree with you, it can't just be, "Let's get together and have lunch." There has to be some substance to requesting the meeting, as you said, because everyone's time is extremely valuable, so... CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. August 15, 2024 Page 17 of 21 Anyone else want to be heard on this? COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Chair, I think it's a great idea. I know the secretary brought up multiple times of us having a workshop with Transportation, so that could easily fall right into this, which, you know, anytime we need a workshop to expand on that, I'm all for it. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Mr. Johnson? MR. JOHNSON: We wouldn't hear him. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Oh, speak into your mic, please, Commissioner. COMMISSIONER SCHUMACHER: Sorry. What I had said was as the secretary had pointed out in previous meetings on having a workshop with Transportation, which we haven't had yet, this would kind of fit into that role where the first one you would have, we could -- we could do with a Transportation aspect, and then if there's another matter that rolls up on that next meeting, that could help expedite matters at hand versus, you know, us taking time from staff repeatedly; you just kind of get it all done in one shot, so... CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. For my part, I'm fully supportive of the concept, and I think timeliness is also good because going forward in 2025, we're probably going to have one or more new planning commissioners, and there are -- there are certain complexities and conundrums, such as traffic and transportation, that impose limitations on what we're able to do, particularly when you're up against potential deficiencies on roadway segments that it would be helpful for all of us to be reminded of and for new people to be educated on. So I support it. Obviously, it's the Board of County Commissioners who's going to have the final say on whether they participate, and I wouldn't presume to second guess where they would come down on that. But if they were to be involved, that would be quite useful to us. If they were not involved, we could still go forward with staff and become educated. So it -- this -- the idea has my support. Anybody else want to be heard on this? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: What, then, Commissioner Sparrazza, should the next steps be? Do you want staff to communicate with the Board? How do you want us to go forward? COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: I think that could be an open conversation between staff and CCPC. What would you think would be the next course of action? MR. BOSI: Mike Bosi, Planning and Zoning director. Often -- you know, when I saw this -- and I completely understand and agree with the benefit of, you know, enhanced communication. What I would say is the Board not only serves their capacity as the BCC but as the chair of a number of advisory committees that they sit on as well. I think four times a year scheduling a workshop with the Board of County -- or three times a year scheduling a workshop with the Board of County Commissioners may be more of an obligation than they're willing to obligate themselves to. But what I would say is with this three -- three-workshop-a-year concept, having the Planning Commission when we identify -- and the reason I said four is because there was four dates that were skipped here. But we could condense it to three. I think we would have a benefit from scheduling that workshop after the Planning Commission meeting has completed. And the Planning Commission prior -- well prior to that first -- that workshop day indicating what's the topic that you'd like to talk about. And I think Transportation and Transportation Planning is a terrific way to initiate that first individual workshop because of the way -- so the statute -- some of the statutes does tie our hands in a little bit of a way in terms of how we apply our Concurrency Management System, but how impact fees and how the overall background traffic is -- is incorporated, how future approvals are related to that -- to the background traffic, as well as the trip counts that we see on the roads, I think those would have a real benefit to the Planning Commission to understanding that. August 15, 2024 Page 18 of 21 And then as we hit individual areas, if you find a topic where you really do think that you would like to engage, you know, the full Board of County Commissioners in a workshop, then staff could float that idea, you know, through the County Manager through coordination with the Board of County Commissioners as to whether they'd like to establish that and what date that could be. I think that would probably be a more balanced way to move forward without trying to obligate the Board on three set dates, but have the Board be aware that you will be having workshops on -- to talk about open-ended areas of interest and of interest to the county's planning activities, and then identify ones where we think you would like to have a joint workshop, because I know they are -- you know, their time is occupied throughout the week in a pretty consistent manner. But I think that having the ability for us to designate three specific times within the calendar year where the Planning Commission says, "This is what I'd like to talk to staff about because I'd like to -- we'd like to explore these topics" -- and I think, like I said, Transportation Planning would be a great way to move forward with a first workshop, and then we could -- as the next workshop schedule would be designated, two months prior -- because you'd want to give them enough time to prepare whatever the topic is, you want them -- whatever the department, whatever the issue is to be pretty well established and vetted so we could have some real good conversations within that workshop. I think that would be an appropriate way to move forward. And then when you hit something where you would really like to -- you think that there would be a benefit from, you know, having that interaction with the full -- the Board body could be an opportunity to say, "Okay, let's see. Can we get that joint workshop?" But what I do know is what it would allow you to do as well -- because each one of you are appointed by an individual commissioner. I know, Joe, you're an environmental, but you can have the opportunity to talk to any one of those commissioners -- it will help you promote some conversation with the individual commissioner to say, "Hey, you know, we had this workshop. We're interested in potentially, you know, having more perspective" or just you pushing back or talking to the commissioners about some of the things you learned within that workshop. It would help you promote some -- some inroads of dialogue. I'm not sure how often you speak with your individual commissioner, but it can provide for inroads of dialogue that you would maybe not have otherwise thought of or kind of like brought to your attention that you'd like to talk to the commissioner about individually, and then if we want them to have a workshop, we could have that -- we could see if that would be something they would be amiable to. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Mike, it sounds like a perfect compromise of initiating CCPC with staff two, possibly three times a year and, as appropriate, ask for that meeting being joined by the BCC. MR. BOSI: Yes, because then we would have to, for that workshop, you know, advertise and Sunshine and all the stuff. We'd have to be ready, getting the room ready, set up for the appropriate manner. But I think that -- I think that really does help us or allow the Planning Commission to dive into something that you don't -- because when we have these individual petitions, I mean, the two LDC amendments we got a little bit more ability to kind of -- to explain how, why, and what we do and what -- why the statute change is changing -- is causing us to change. But we don't really get into, all right, how does Transportation specifically get to their recommendation of approval when you have about 45, 50 people saying, "Oh, but the traffic over at this segment of road is unacceptable," but Transportation has a level of -- has a level of service they find that there's capacity on the road system, and they're moving forward. So having dialogue in between what the realities are that people are expressing and how Transportation goes about, you know, reviewing petitions, I think, most certainly, would have a beneficial effect. And with two new commissioners going to be coming onto the dais, I think it's going to be -- it would be something that -- we should probably plan for that first meeting at the August 15, 2024 Page 19 of 21 turn of the year to be that workshop -- our workshop to kick us off, and then we can go from there. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Commissioner Shea. COMMISSIONER SHEA: I could think of a lot of topics. You could talk to us about concurrency, which we think we understand, but I don't -- I've never heard a really good presentation that I've been able to mentally grasp on concurrency, which I guess is mostly on the transportation side, or is that with all -- it's all the infrastructure. MR. BOSI: No, it's all -- no, it's all your Category A facilities. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Yeah. MR. BOSI: All your Category A facilities are the ones -- it's parks, it's your utilities, it's transportation, it's stormwater, it's schools. Those are the ones that have to be analyzed from a checkbook -- and we used to call it checkbook concurrency. And the checkbook concurrency is nice because everyone -- well, people used to use checks, and you would have to make sure -- you'd deduct your -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: I still do. MR. BOSI: You would deduct your amount of your check to make sure that you weren't overdrawn against your balance. So that concept people would understand, so we called it a checkbook concurrency. So it's the same thing for Transportation, for Utilities, for Parks, making sure that there was enough capacity to handle the additional loads that these projects were going. That's the concept of it. But the application of it, I think, is -- has been influenced by statutes, and there's been an evolution, so I think there would be benefits of that -- COMMISSIONER SHEA: Timing -- timing is very important, and that's the part of concurrency that confuses most people is when you put the timing -- MR. BOSI: Correct. COMMISSIONER SHEA: -- of when's this development coming in, you know, et cetera, et cetera. Does the Board have any -- BCC have any of these types of workshops that Randy's suggesting on their own? MR. BOSI: Well, the Board started -- and normally in January, at the turn of the year, they will have workshops on topics at hand, January, February, and March, sometimes in April. But the seasonal months they will -- almost every year they schedule individual workshops on topics that they feel is important to discuss with the community. Sometimes it can be joint workshops with the City of Naples, sometimes with the City of Marco Island. So the Board of County Commissioners regularly does have workshops starting in the seasonal months. COMMISSIONER SHEA: So some of the topics they have we might be interested in, might fit into what Randy's talking about. CHAIRMAN FRYER: All right. Thank you very much. Anybody else want to be heard on this? If not -- MR. BOSI: And I would say, we will coordinate with Transportation Planning to have the first -- that February 20th to be the first workshop that we're going to have to talk just about transportation and transportation in general, and I'm sure Transportation would look forward to providing some education and enlightenment to the Planning Commission in terms of how they do their job and what -- you know, the time frames we're looking at but also some of the work that we do within the MPO that's not only within the short term but the long term and how that works and how that fits into the overall paradigm of how we develop roads. You know, roads don't start off in your 5- or your 10-year CIE. They start off in your Long-Range Transportation Plan, and they have to be identified. Sometimes they're in the needs plan but not the -- they don't have the financing for it. But -- and eventually it works its way down and gets to the six- and the 10-year, which is your second year -- the second five years of your CIE, and then it gets to your -- to your Years 1 through 5, and then when it gets into Year 1 or 2 of the August 15, 2024 Page 20 of 21 project, it means fundings have been available, it's ready to start, it's going, it's a guarantee. So there's a lot of -- a lot of movement between that 25-, 30-year lookout to when the project actually starts. And I think they would do a terrific job of providing a good overview of how we go about that and how our projects fit within that continuum. COMMISSIONER SHEA: Right. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. Thank you very much, Commissioner Sparrazza, for bringing that up. It looks like we are unanimous in our support of the idea, and the matter's in the hands of staff to see if we can carry it forward. Thank you, sir. COMMISSIONER SPARRAZZA: Thank you, everybody, for your time. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you. MR. BOSI: And, Chair, before you break, I just wanted to recognize and thank Mr. Derek Perry who was able to expertly navigate us through the perilous waters of legality in an intact form. So thank you, Derek. CHAIRMAN FRYER: I second that. Thank you. MR. BOSI: As you notice, Ms. Ashton wasn't here today, so he was riding solo, so I just wanted to call that out. CHAIRMAN FRYER: Thank you for saving us from ourselves. Thank you. All right. Is there any other new business? (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: Any public comment, matters that are not on the agenda, now would be the time. (No response.) CHAIRMAN FRYER: I don't see any hands raised. So without objection, we are adjourned. COMMISSIONER SCHMITT: Thank you. ******* August 15, 2024 Page 21 of 21 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 10:04 a.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION _________________________________________ JOSEPH SCHMITT, VICE-CHAIRMAN These minutes approved by the Board on 9/20/2024_, as presented _X__________ or as corrected __________. TRANSCRIPT PREPARED ON BEHALF OF FORT MYERS COURT REPORTING BY TERRI L. LEWIS, RPR, FPR-C, COURT REPORTER AND NOTARY PUBLIC.