Loading...
CCPC Minutes 09/03/2009 S September 3, 2009 TRANSCRIPT OF THE FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT MEETING OF THECOLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Naples, Florida September 3, 2009 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 2: 15 p.m. in SPECIAL SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Mark Strain Donna Reed-Caron Karen Homiak Tor Kolflat (Absent) Paul Midney Bob Murray Brad Schiffer Robert Vigliotti (Absent) David 1. Wolfley ALSO PRESENT: Jeffrey Klatzkow, County Attorney Joseph Schmitt, CDES, Administrator Ray Bellows, Zoning Manager Page 1 September 3, 2009 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Now, welcome everyone to the September 3rd Meeting of the Collier County Planning Commission. This is a continuation of the Floodplain Management Meeting that we had started on Monday, August 24th, 2009. It was continued to this date to pick other dates in which we can actually meet. We didn't intend to meet and discuss it today, but at the time on Monday, August 24th, we had no other dates. But as a result of all the discussion that we had on Monday, August 24th, it appears there's going to be a change. Mr. Schmitt, I'll ask you to explain things to us. MR. SCHMITT: Basically I'm withdrawing the item from your agenda. I've asked -- or directed Robert to send it back to the floodplain committee to review all the options as defined in the floodplain manager's coordination manual, and for them to review and come back with a recommendation. So stated in simple terms, we either just close the meeting or I just continue indefinitely. Either one is the same thing. It's -- but you will not see the ordinance for quite a while. The intent here is also we're going to be facing an issue related but different, and that is the fielding of the flood insurance rate maps, which is going to be another significant event in Collier County. That will take place in the January, February time frame. And until those maps are fielded and the impact of those maps in relation to our community rating system and some of the proposals that come from the floodplain committee, I think it's just best that we kind of go back and send the entire package back to the committee review; again what's in the coordinator's manual and then come back with a proposal to look at how do we want to -- what is their recommendation to you in regards to pursuing a change in classification, whether we look for some of the other alternatives rather than what I would call structural alternatives. There are other alternatives that you've all discussed and certainly are worth exploring. Page 2 September 3, 2009 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Before -- I know Mr. Murray wants to speak, but before he does, I want to kind of make a clarification. I know you said that the flood rate maps don't necessarily work are the same discussion as the CRS rating system. Well, the problem is the CRS rating system dictates rules in certain flood categories, and if the maps change the county's categories, those rules have a much broader impact than coastal areas where you might have expected FEMA to have a stronger representation. And when -- you're now saying that farm fields have FEMA concerns. That was the link I believe everybody needs to be aware of. And that when we pass those rules, we're not passing them now just for the high expected areas along the county where people move expecting to have flood problems, but we're passing them for everybody, including Immokalee, which is clear on that map will have a significant impact from FEMA's new rules. So that's the purpose for linking them together, Joe, and-- MR. SCHMITT: Understand. The ordinance -- if you take some of the structural measures in the ordinance, it does have an impact, because you're -- those are all based on what is called base flood elevation. Many areas that in Golden Gate that were labeled as a D zone, which is undetermined, there are going to be AH zones, X zones, AH zones scattered throughout the county. And of course then they'll be defined base flood elevations for those. And yes, those -- any ordinance that requires freeboard or other type of what I call structural alternatives would then impact those areas of the county. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Mr. Murray? COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Joe, just to be helpful to Mr. Wiley, I know you said that the statute requires that there be a planner on that committee. And unfortunately you lost a good planner in Mike Page 3 September 3, 2009 DeRuntz, who was a certified manager in that area too. Just as a thought, are you going to be able, given your staff limitations, going to be able to provide Mr. Wiley that kind of assistance? Because apparently he wasn't getting that. Not for anybody's fault but he just wasn't getting it. MR. SCHMITT: Well, it's a matter -- to answer your question probably in a limited scope, it's a matter of funding. This is general fund dollars 111 that pays for this. As with certainly the committee members, there's -- it's about a 50/50 between staff and volunteers, appointed volunteers. We pretty much take that out of hide. But I still have to be able to fund someone out of general fund dollars to sit on that. If I take a planner out of zoning department, they're funded primarily out of fees collected for rezoning or other activities. Yes, I could put a planner from the zoning department on, but then that's taking away from what they are paid to do and that is to review petitions and review plats and plans. I'll probably be looking at someone in Comprehensive Planning, their general fund, but they also have a lot on their plate as well, a whole list of things. So yes, to answer your question, I'll look at it. But it's again, a matter of the limited resources I have, how I -- where I place those resources, and the effectiveness of expending general fund dollars, whether that's -- it's something I want to look at putting on this or just simply delay it. But right now we're going to take it back to the committee, we'll look at where the committee wants to go with this. But I do expect once we get issued the final version of the digital flood insurance maps, that's going to become a -- certainly become an issue. And dealing with those and this whole flood ordinance may be secondary until we get through that process. Page 4 September 3, 2009 COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Okay. Well, that's the reason I was really asking the question is that you said it was the statute required it. And inasmuch as the statute required it, for us to be able to review it effectively and approve it as we should, we should have the elements that comprise the statute agreed to. And what my conclusion would be then, based on your very severe limitations, we probably won't see this for a lot longer than you first indicated. It will be a while. MR. SCHMITT: It will be, yes. It's at least six months away, if not longer. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: The public should know that, because I think right now the public is concerned. MR. SCHMITT: But again, that depends on where the committee wants to go with it. There are public appointed constituents who are part of that committee and certainly they're going to have an influence as to where this thing goes as well. So we're taking it back to the committee and for all intent and purposes we're starting at ground zero. COMMISSIONER MURRAY: Zero. Okay. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: I would like to recommend to the board that we adj ourn that meeting. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Well -- CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Go ahead. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: -- I just want to say one thing first. One thing we never did do, was really go, page-by-page through the actual draft ordinance. The first meeting we had a presentation; we did a little bit of it. The second meeting we actually went into the handbook and discussed credits we were missing. And I guess so now it's going to go back to the committee to go through the handbook and thoroughly vet all the potential stuff. But there was a lot of comments that I had just on the -- you Page 5 September 3, 2009 know, that we never really got to. And I guess if it goes through the committee and comes back with that same format, we're -- other than bringing in more additional points, I just wonder if we should -- MR. SCHMITT: I would encourage if any members of the Planning Commission have comments, you could contact either me or contact Robert with your comments and we'll be glad to sit down and talk to you. But I can't tell you right now whether what you saw is going to come back again in that same format or same recommendations. I think the floodplain committee may look at this as a different approach. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: And Joe, maybe if you could let us know the schedule, maybe one meeting I would go and just discuss some of the issues I had with the report that they had that weren't -- had nothing to do with the manual. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Okay, anybody else? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Ifnot, is there a motion to adjourn the floodplain management meeting? COMMISSIONER MURRAY: So moved. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Made by -- COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Second. CHAIRMAN STRAIN: -- Mr. Murray, seconded by Mr. Wolfley. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. COMMISSIONER SCHIFFER: Aye. COMMISSIONER HOMIAK: Aye. COMMISSIONER MURRA Y: Aye. COMMISSIONER MIDNEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER WOLFLEY: Aye. COMMISSIONER CARON: Aye. Page 6 September 3,2009 CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Aye. Anybody opposed? (No response.) CHAIRMAN STRAIN: Motion carries 7-0. We're out of here. Thank you all. ****** There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 2:23 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MARK STRAIN, Chairman These minutes approved by the board on as presented or as corrected . Transcript prepared on behalf of Gregory Reporting Service, Inc., by Cherie' R. Nottingham. Page 7