Loading...
DSAC-LDR Minutes 05/20/20251 MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING Naples, Florida May 20th, 2025 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee Land Development Review Subcommittee and Collier County, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3:00 PM in REGULAR SESSION at Growth Management Community Development Department Building, Conference Room #609/610 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr., Naples, Florida, 34102 with the following members present: Chairman: Clay Brooker (Chairman) Blair Foley – EXCUSED Jeffrey Curl Mark McLean Robert Mulhere The following County Staff were in attendance: Eric Johnson, LDC Planning Manager, GMCD Richard Henderlong, Planner III, GMCD Angela Galiano, Planner II, GMCD Josephine Medina, Planner III, GMCD Heather Cartwright-Yilmaz, Management Analyst / Staff Liaison, GMCD Jaime Cook, Development Review Director, GMCD 2 Any person who decides to appeal a decision of This Board you will need a record of the proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based, Neither Collier County nor This Board shall be responsible for providing this record. 1.CALL TO ORDER – Chairman Chairman Clay Brooker Development Service Advisory Committee – Land Development Review Subcommittee, Tuesday, 20th May 2025 was called to order at 3:00 PM 2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA Clay Brooker Agenda approved. Motion passed Determined New order to discuss Agenda based on Speakers available 4a, 4d, 4b to 4C. See changes below. 3.Old Business None 4.New Business a.PL20250004659 – Home Based Business Updates LDCA Eric Johnson-Spoke in 4a introduced new amendments Eric Johnson- Determining language in local code vs State code. Mr. Brooker-Determining parking regulations- Differences between Local and State Eric Johnson-Updating future ordinances for parking/storage. Referenced definitions in the LDC Mr. Curl- Identify Problems with buffering requirements Mr. Brooker opened for Public comments Public speaker-Tim Maloney Golden Gate- Identifying Verbiage in Ordinance and impacts of ordinance in the county. Identifying exploration of home occupation statute. Encourages updating the ordinance in these areas A.Problem with estates using residential properties B.Can’t generate additional traffic C.Uses of fleet vehicles in residential areas D.Types of vehicles (tonnage) and impact of these businesses Public Speaker- William Mars- Landscape company impact. Shared pictures of Landscape vehicles parked on vacant lot. Video of a truck backing up, Video of trucks parked together, Video of trucks backing up traffic. Examples or residential impact. Applicability and broadness or ordinance compared to another county. 3 Public speaker- Mark Teeters- Golden Gate master plan advertised “1000 small businesses in Golden Gate.” Importance of getting verbiage correct. Rezoning the estates and impact construction companies in residential areas, campers/Trailers and their impact. Use/impact of Code enforcement. Using backyards as storage. The current impact of the estates zoning is hard to enforce. Mr. Brooker- Closed public comments Unknown- Adding to clarify on the statement “multiple business” Quite a few issues need more regulation pertaining to traffic impact. Need to clarify verbiage “use of estates parcels by right” Need to come back to this issue as there are too many issues. Mr. Brooker- Determining a way forward based on existing precedence. Mr. Mulhere- AG zoning vs estates zoning Mr. Curl-Need to reference existing precedence. Rethink allowed businesses, screening businesses, required screenings buffers and heights Mr. Brooker- Existing ordinance/statute in works might take care of it. Residential character. Mr. Mulhere- Where do Landscapers go, AG use Mr. Mulhere- Motion to continue discussion Mr. Brooker- second. Motion passes b.PL20240008632 – Solar Facilities and Electrical Substations LDCA Uknown- Existing LDC doesn’t address facilities. Proposing amendment to solar facilities, issues addressed by FPL and anticipated issues. Tal Berman- Discussing solar development in Collier County on AG land. Remove citrus and place solar. Limit impacts on protected areas. Low impact. No concrete/impermeable. Low to the ground. Jem Frantz- LDC amendment eliminates inconsistencies in statute amendment and addresses buffering requirements. New definitions, new sections on solar facilities and substations, updates list of essential services. Adds exemptions and additions. Mr. Mulhere-Adding to AG use, essential use, solar, are they essential services? Mr. Mclean- Are they storing on site, how? Tal Berman- Size of shipping containers line up next to each other at substation. Changing, injecting renewables/solar. Mr. Mclean-Defining storage Jem Frantz- Would have to follow AG restrictions Mr. Curl- References buffer language, “trees and shrubs” Jem Frantz- From state statute language Mr. Curl- AG transitions Mr. Berman-Avoiding primary panther habitat. Jaime- Not running into too many issues as using old farms. Mr. Mulhere- Motion to recommend approval, subject to continue discussion after staff review, whether it is reasonable to establish, to look at the development standards to 4 make sure there are standards on the height. We talked about minor corrections (e.g., trees, shrubs, buffers). Confirm Height requirements. Mr. Curl- Second Further discussion ensues regarding existing standards in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District. Mr. Brooker – There is consensus that existing height limitation of 35 feet is acceptable. The motion was revised by a different member of the Subcommittee. Mr. Mclean - Second Mr. Brooker- Revised motion passes unanimously. c.PL20250005043 – Group Housing Updates LDCA Mr. Mulhere – Made a motion to approve and commended staff for being proactive in terms of seeing that the market is demanding most of the time, things in PUDs and floor area ratios are 0.60 anyway. Mr. Brooker- He had a question regarding Page 3 lines 13 and 14- Increasing from 0.45, except nursing homes, ALFs, continuing care facilities can have a FAR of 0.60, provided that the Future Land Use Element of the Growth Management Plan allows for the greater ratio. Are there limitations? Ms. Medina- Yes, there are certain ones that we did find have limitations, like the RFMUD, for example. Certain private amendments do as well. There were some that the PUD doesn’t reference back to the LDC, so we wanted to make that clear, that if the Future Land Use designation says 0.45, the LDC can’t allow (a greater FAR). Mr. Johnson – They have to be consistent with each other. Mr. Brooker- Where is it restricted to 0.45? Ms. Medina- Receiving lands, neutral lands, within the rural village, within the conservation designation, Buckley property and that settlement agreement. They don’t have a PUD yet Mr. Mulhere – That is a subdistrict of the rural fringe? Ms. Medina- Yes, and in the agricultural and rural mixed-use district, there is a floating subdistrict that has restrictions as well. Those were the ones we were able to find. All the other ones, we were able to find public ones, but the PUD restricted it, so when they come in to change their PUD, they would also have to change their corresponding (indiscernible) Mr. Brooker- Thank you. We have a motion to recommend approval by Bob Mr. Curl- Second Mr. Brooker- Motion to approved amended passes unanimously. d.PL20250005475 – Mailed Notice Rural Agricultural Zoned Land LDCA Mr. Mulhere- We have 500 ft. in urban area and 1000 ft. in Rural area. 5 Mr. Mclean- What I don’t understand on the160 acre parcel- it only notified property owners at 1000ft and 9 lots but where is the notification taken from, the center or perimeter of the parcel? Mr. Henderlong- It’s measured from the perimeter of the parcel. Some residents of Sable Palm Road did not get notified. He explained that the Board felt the current standard to the notification process was inadequate, and they requested other various distances for the mailed notice requirement be look at recommending it be one mile. Mr. Mulhere- What is the one mile for, currently the Urban and Rural Golden Gate Estates area. What are the other areas? Define what areas get and what distance. The 1,000 ft. only applies to designated rural AG. Discussion on notification distances to rural and urban areas in collier county. Mr. Henderlong- For urban AG zoned land in Pine Ridge subdivision, a commissioner said a new property, the mailed distance was inadequate when compared to what other communities are doing. He described the Pine Ridge property’s location. He said, the board direction was to take the one-mile suggestion back and publicly vets the mailed notice distance change. He presented other options to the mailed notice distances by reference to Exhibit C. To assist the decision of a distance change, on pages 6 and 7, mailed distances of other Florida communities were given for public consideration. He noted, on page 7, Seminole County had distances based on acreage sizes, 5, 10, and greater than 10 acres and a minimum number of parcels. Staff did not recommend this standard. Mr. Mulhere- So this is limited to the proposal of one mile to rural AG zoned lands Ms. Cook- Provided a perspective on the new week Board agenda item at 341 Sabal Palm that all of the surrounding lands are conservation land and the notice sign sizes are too small to notify residents in Winding Cypress and Village Walk. Mr. Brooker and Mr. Mclean-Noted the increase to one mile is costly with 5,680 notices at the Pine Ridge and Goodlette Rd. parcel Mclean- Motioned to suggest ½ mile Mr. Mulhere- Seconded the motion Mr. Brooker- Motion passed unanimously. 5.PUBLIC SPEAKERS No additional public speakers. Noted in the section above. 6.UPCOMING DSAC-LDR SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING DATES DISCUSSION: a.Tuesday, June 17, 2025 b.Tuesday, September 16, 2025 c.Tuesday, November 18, 2025 Clay Brooker Accepted motion to adjourn 7.MEETING ADJOURNED 6 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the chairman at 4:50 p.m.