Loading...
BCC Minutes 11/03/2003 W (PUD Workshop #2)November 3, 2003 TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PUD MONITORING WORKSHOP Naples, Florida, November 3, 2003 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Board of County Commissioners in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 9:00 AM in WORKSHOP SESSION in Building "F" of the Government Complex, East Naples, Florida, with the following members present: CHAIRMAN: Commissioner Tom Henning Commissioner James Coletta Commissioner Fred Coyle Commissioner Donna Fiala Commissioner Frank Halas ALSO PRESENT: James Mudd-Collier County Manager Marj orie Student-Assistant County Attorney Maryann Devanas-Senior Planner Joe Schmitt - Comm. Dev. & Environmental Services Ed Kant - Transportation Russ Mueller- Transportation Stan Krasowski - Planning Services Patrick White - Assistant County Attorney Robin Meyer - Planning Services Susan Murray - Planning Services Page 1 COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WORKSHOP AGENDA November 3, 2003 9:00 a.m. Tom Henning, Chairman, District 3 Donna Fiala, Vice-Chair, District 1 Frank Halas, Commissioner, District 2 Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4 Jim Coletta, Commissioner, District 5 NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING. SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO TIlE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 99-22 REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND RECORDS DEPARTMENT. REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE BOARD ON SUBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT ON THIS AGENDA MUST BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING WITH EXPLANATION TO THE COUNTY MANAGER AT LEAST 13 DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE MEETING AND WILL BE HEARD UNDER "PUBLIC PETITIONS". ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD 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. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO FIVE (5) MINUTES UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY 1 November 3, 2003 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE. e Pledge of Allegiance PUD Monitoring Report #2 Seek guidance on preparation of Land Development Code Amendments regarding the building height regulations and height definition 4. Adjourn 2 November 3, 2003 November 3, 2003 The Workshop of the Collier County Commissioners was called to order at 9:00 AM. Pledge of Allegiance was recited. Commissioner Henning questioned sufficient advertising to conduct the Workshop. Marjorie Student - Assistant County Attorney stated it was reviewed with Mr. Pettit and her and concluded it was advertised 24 hours before thc meeting, so consequently will proceed. 2. PUD Monitoring Report #2: Joe Schmitt - Community Services & Environmental Services - this is the second report on the PUD Audit. Gave a presentation - enclosed. - There are 327 PUD's in Collier County - Staff reviewed commitments to County through review and approval process. - October 2002 - was requested to initiate study. June 2003 - 25 inspected - today's workshop next 26 inspected. First task was to go through all PUD's No large omissions were found such as school sites, library sites or transportation. - Found standard maintenance issues such as: littorals, retention ponds, encroachment in preservation areas, signalization, and arterial lighting (brightness). Staff prepared summary reports. Gave number and percentage of commitment categories. - Inspected the 50 PUD's and amend LDC. - Gave fee schedule amendment - raised $50 per dwelling unit within PUD to raise the needed revenues to pay for review process. Will raise approx. $240-260,000. Discussion was held on an explanation of the fees given above. Mr. Schmitt is trying to raise revenues for staff time that is devoted to the project. They are doing 25 PUD's a quarter, which would be a 3 year cycle. This is a one time fee. Only units that are a part of the PUD will be assessed the $50.00. Hours devoted by staff were covered. Mr. Schmitt stated they are trying to be pro-active that prior to turnover by the developer to the Homeowners Association, the commitments are identified so the Homeowners don't get stuck with them. Commissioner Coyle suggested providing some sort of incentive to the Developer; making sure they are in compliance, and assess the people that are not in compliance. Monies have been received recently from interest of funds from the Clerk of Courts Office and some of that interest was earned by the funds that are paid to Mr. Schmitt's office that had been previously removed. It is now returned into the Page 2 November 3, 2003 General Fund of which could possibly be utilized to offset these costs. This is money that is not already spent. - The older cases should be cleared off the records. - There should be some type of final compliance audit to protect the Homeowners Associations. Commissioner Coletta supported a "User Fee". Maryann Devanas - Senior Planner - Comprehensive Planning - continued with the presentation: - She was the point person working with the various departments. Looked at findings - bring information up-to-date for files. She gave the Compliance Findings Covered 5 PUD's Pending Reclassification - The publicity received brought awareness to the community and more attention given to Developers. Commissioner Fiala questions how they can be brought into compliance and what are they going to do about it? Many resident homeowners are upset and find it difficult for them to make possible expenditures. Joe Schmitt responded they are notifying the Developer what they need to do to come into compliance. Many of the Developers have been very cooperative. Different steps need to take place to correct the deficiencies or amend their PUD. Staff will need to proceed through the Code Enforcement Board if they don't come into compliance; citation or notice of violation - then before the Board. County Manager Mudd stated if still under Developer control, they can be tagged and not give CO's until they are into compliance. If turned over to a Homeowners Association need to open up the PUD or if minor, work with Homeowners and try to get back into compliance. Newer developments - bond can be held. Commissioner Henning stated the County has a responsibility and they have failed to seek and verify the compliance issues. If in the hands of the Homeowners Associations, he would like to see it given up. Initiate an Amendment and deal with just the compliance issues. It's not the fault of the residents; the County did not do their job. Maryann stated the Ordinance is very clear for complying, but the timing may not be as clear; such as signalization - not needed until there is demand on the road system - determined in the future. Monitoring reports are to be submitted and in the past the reports were not submitted to the County. With review now they will be more accurate. Page 3 November 3, 2003 Commissioner Halas noted he was concerned with the preserves and exotics, and wondered if it was 'real clear. Maryann stated they are going to make written recommendations to the Developers and Homeowners so they are aware of the requirements and needed maintenance to the environment. Maryann continued with the Cumulative Findings. - Most categories of commitments were in Transportation and Environmental. - Others were Street Lights, Water Management, Utilities and Landscaping. Ed Kant- Transportation mentioned the fair share and commitments if not warranted - even if in PUD, still not a commitment if not needed. In conclusion Joe Schmitt gave the following recommendations: ~ Continue with next 25 PUD's and come back in 3-4 months with report. - Those out of compliance - bring into compliance. - Identity costs and how it will be paid - Nov. 3rd is the effective date of the new fee schedule. No entity for the Homeowner to turn to when going through turn-over process. Should Government be involved in the process? (Community Service) Corrective Action - Establish a point of contact in the County and identify and maintain a list of Presidents of Homeowner Associations. Provide a resource center for documents. Prepare a "Guide" for Organization of Homeowners Associations. Commissioner Henning asked about the Certificate of Light Meter - Street lights. Russ Mueller - have found in checking with the light meter readings in the County there are many not in compliance with the brightness and need the readings to see if they are with the industry standards and in the LDC. Start Krasowski will send the section that relates to this subject to all the Commissioners. SPEAKERS Floyd Chapin - 228 Belina Dr. -President of Topaz at Sapphire Lakes -he stated that most of the non-compliance issues sounded like the workshop was geared toward his development. He has been a resident for 13 years and property was turned over from Developer one year ago. Exotics needed to be removed and the Homeowners paid $40,000 for removal. The Developer knew about this non-compliance before Page 4 November 3, 2003 turn over, but was never enforced by the County. The Homeowners paid and do not want to pay for any more violations left by the Developer. They do not feel it is fair nor want the Developers problems put on the Homeowners any longer. He didn't feel they should increase the taxes to use for a staff member to monitor the commitments. Their Developers, Jacob Nagar and Mickey Kessous have given them problems; such as when suggested to the County to not issue CO's until some of these issues were cleared up, the Counties answer was "no". They were issued, and the property is still not in compliance. The County needs to be responsible for what has happened. On May 8th, a townhall meeting was held when one of the Sapphire Lakes Presidents addressed an exotic problem on a piece of commercial property adjacent to theirs - Michelle Arnold was going to have an inspector look at it and get back in 30 days. Have not heard from anyone - and said it is not fair to the residents to not get a response from the County. He would like to see an Annual Review from Jacob Nagar and Mickey Kessous and didn't think the County would find one. Connie Fullerton - Gabriel Circle - President of Master Association at Sapphire Lakes - they support a department being set up centrally - someone that will receive all the information from the various departments, guide the Homeowners against any pitfalls at turnover. Notify the Homeowners of any problems they are aware of. They should be advised in advance of any amendments to a PUD. They were just made aware that in 1984 the original filed for the Green Huron sub-division by Mr. Michael Kessous. In 1990 - they were told in the original PUD there would be clubhouses and many amenities. It was amended in 1995 and just now made aware of it. It was advertised as a gated community - and now is trying to come up with funds for gates. Developers should not be able to get away with these non-compliances and wants the Board to look out for the taxpayer and work with them. Ron Rellin~er - Cedar Hammock Circle - Cedar Hammock - will be turned over soon. Residents are concerned that all the permits etc. are adhered to. The permits would include engineering, transportation, environment and code enforcement. He has been involved in the past 6-8 months concerning littoral plantings and water management with some success and some not so successful. The Cedar Hammock residents request the Commissioners to provide a monitoring inspection process to satisfy the permits issued. After completed, a letter or documentation from the County should be acknowledged to the compliance or the non-compliance with recommendations. David Ellis - Collier Building Industry Association - CBIA - Review of the PUD's was his concern - as after the last meeting, the County did not talk to the Developers involved to seek their input. The Developers he spoke with mentioned they have sent the information to the County, and the County did not receive it and would have to be sent again. The County needs a better system and organization to monitor and maintain the information. Many things change and developers are not Page 5 November 3, 2003 aware of them and not aware of them not being in compliance. Many of the Developers want to be in compliance. Needs to be an organization, on a regular basis, that reviews the monitoring reports. There has been no follow-up in the past and money issues that have been addressed. Need to address timing issues - sidewalks, lights, signalization etc. Funding - agrees with the interest issue being put back into the proper accounts. There ought to be penalties from the County to hold the developers accountable. Also need to have a clear final inspection or review before the Homeowners take over. Al Zichella - CBIA - agreed with the fees from interest from the Clerk of Courts. He was impressed with the list and could see that no one is doing anything seriously wrong. Some are foggy - littorals can die over time and Homeowners cannot control it and can be worked out after turnover. Exotics - grow back and are intrusive. After removing the exotics, the developer did what he was suppose to do and had the inspection, but grow back. He addressed the traffic signaling, bus shelters and lighting. Some of the non- compliances' shouldn't be there as they just came up with some of the standards a year ago. He can't believe some of the Developers wouldn't take out exotics or comply with some of the things that have been brought up. Turnover happens and then need to be maintained. It is the responsibility of the Homeowner, but should be fair. Commissioner Halas gave an example of residents in his area that have had some heated discussions with the Developer to take care of non-compliance issues and some difficult times where they are now hiring an attorney to take care of them. Developer responsibilities should be taken care of before turnover. Bob Mulhere - RWA - he covered the process the County and the Developers go through with the issues being addressed earlier. The areas of concern that show up constantly, he feels, is where there is some confusion. The timing needs to be clear. The exotics were used as an example stating you can't be in compliance until the whole process is completed. The idea is to do it in perpetuity. After turnover it becomes the Homeowners Association responsibility. The Developer took care of his responsibility and these issues need to be addressed before turnover. The County may want to be involved in the process to facilitate what the responsibilities are going to be to the Homeowners after turnover. The process needs to be understood also with the Developer who doesn't agree they are out of compliance. Need to go through the process and be reasonable. If enforcement is "kicked up" and people understand they have to comply there will be less need for staff involvement. Most are willing to resolve the issues. Doug Fee - 921 Carrick Bend Circle - President of North Bay Civic Assoc.- Page 6 November 3, 2003 Doug's comments and concerns were being informed as a citizen and know where to seek information. The County Website is valuable. He has been able to find the list of PUD's, Ordinance's and units approved, but suggested they have a link for PUD Summary or Information for a copy of the Ordinance or amendments etc. Site Development Plans would also be helpful. This allows the citizen, through technology, to follow what is going on in their neighborhood. Mr. Robert McConnell - 1435 Gormican Lane - Collier's Reserve Assoc. Inc. - President of the Homeowners Assoc. - he discussed notification and a PUD within a PUD and the area that Colliers Reserve entails. During turnover they hired an attorney (1/2002). There have been other problems in the past and have been taken care of. They have responded to the County concerning the present issues and have had no communication on the 4 page report that was submitted to the County. Several thousand dollars has been spent researching the past 10 years of Colliers Reserve. They had cooperation from the Developer, but took 8 weeks to finish the report. Since turnover, they have had in access of $300,000 a year for various items, with $100,000 for exotics etc. They are dedicated to make their community a first class community and agree with Mr. Schmitt that communication is foremost important. The Homeowners Assoc. need some sort of documentation or certification that the work has been completed. He pleads for the County to contact the Homeowners Assoc. with the PUD's. Commissioner Coyle stated there are a series of problems and gave these recommendations: - One problem is failure on the part of the Government, developers and failure to involve the Homeowners. Staff seems willing to zero out certain commitments if it appears they are not necessary, and he is in favor of it. But be careful not to zero out such commitments as installing a traffic light, just because it is not required today, doesn't mean they can transfer the cost to the taxpayers five years from now when it is required. 1.) Have someone on staff that is responsible for monitoring the reports, inspecting the PUD's and communicating with the Homeowners. A central point of contact. It could be more than one person if needed. A consensus of the Commissioners agreed. 2.) Funding/Support the Staff- feels there should be a mechanism in place to punish those that don't comply and not those that do comply. He would like to see a portion of the interest earned that use to go to the Community Development & Environmental Services Dept. to pay for the cost initially while developing a funding mechanism for developers that do not comply. Page 7 November 3, 2003 There is a difference in failure to comply in removing exotics and a failure to comply with certain amenities which are not a part of the PUD but expected by the Homeowners. The Commissioners need to define their responsibility and wonder if they are to get involved in a Homeowner Assoc. agreement and try to in force it, as it has not been done before. But the Homeowner needs to be protected. The Homeowner needs to know what the County can enforce and what they can not enforce. If there are amenities in the Homeowners Documents, should they require a bond to assure compliance of that developer so the Homeowners don't get stuck with it later, even though amenities are not necessarily a government responsibility? This needs to be addressed. Marjorie Student - Assistant County Attorney - stated there may be a provision that deals with a Public facility section of the Code. It would have to be looked at. She has a concern with fees that she will look at. Local Government of PUD's - local Government cannot write one and then rezone someone's property to the PUD. Also discussed Amendments, Health, Safety & Welfare issues and DRI's. A lengthy discussion followed on Fund #313 and the interest that is being returned to the General Fund and where the funds will come from for Mr. Schmitt's Dept. for PUD monitoring reports. County Manager Mudd will report at the next meeting how much funding is used for the next 25 PUD monitoring and will then see how to do a non-compliance fee. 3.) Need to find a way to stop hassling Homeowners for problems that were not taken care by the Developer in the past and has already been turned over. When simple - place on the consent agenda. When it is clear cut, the Homeowners should not be required to pick up the cost of which should have been done by the developer many years ago. Legally, is there any legal recourse against the developer after it has been turned over? County Manager Mudd summarized: once turned over to HOA and items are minor, go to the Board with PUD amended. Also a checklist, possibly a final turnover inspection document - so they don't keep coming back and then become a Code Enforcement case. 11:10 AM - Break 11:25 AM - Reconvened Page 8 November 3, 2003 Seek Guidance on Preparation of Land Development Code Amendments Regarding the Building Height Regulations and Height Definition Joe Schmitt - Community Development & Environmental Services Adm. They are in the midst of their Cycle 3 Land Development Code Amendments and need guidance from the Board of Commissioners. They will present the principles in regards to Building Heights - where it is measured from. In the March Workshop on building heights the BCC asked the staff to come back for guidance in the process. He introduced Robin Meyer -Principal planner with Dept. of Zoning and Land Development - staff was directed to address the issue of"Truth in Advertising" - develop some options and give direction. He gave a presentation with the following outline: (Attached) FEMA Flood Elevations - all applicable space must be above flood zones _ Vanderbilt Beach Area was shown on the maps FEMA Flood Zone and Elevation in feet (NGVD) Zone heights - above FEMA to mid peak of roofs - Actual Height is much higher. - 11 feet of FEMA level - now they do not count the actual building height until the first habitable floor - 5 ½ feet difference. Awarded the builder to use as a garage or other use. Do they want to continue to measure from first habitable floor or use the FEMA elevation or grade? Showed the Economics Covered Options: 1. Status Quo 2. Amend Definition of Building Height 3. Change How Height is measured & options for providing Relief 4. Allow Two Habitable Floors above FEMA for Single Family 5. Review & change Building Heights for all Zoning Classifications 6. Remove Option of Additional Building Height for Parking under the Building. - He covered the pros and cons of each of the above. - Staff Recommendation is: - Option #2 - Amend the Current Building Height - need to address the difference between "zoning height" (allowable floor space each zone allows from peak to mid-point in eaves and "actual height" (from ground to the top of the building). Address "Truth in Advertising" by directing applicant to address both during public hearings. He talked about the Burt Harris claim in the various options. Page 9 November 3, 2003 SPEAKERS ~ - 85 Ridge Drive - Pine Ridge - his concerns were about the mn off and elevation and flooding during the heavy summer rains. Many changes are taking place (which is good), but they are building hugh homes with amenities which is creating a hugh increase in run off. The swales run into a pond and can't mn off fast enough. He suggests something be done in the code to minimize the run off from the new developments. B.J. Savard-Boyer. - President of Vanderbilt Beach Property Owners Assn. - she has seen an influx ofmega homes built in the Vanderbilt Beach area. They are beautiful and impressive. Most lots are 10,000 sq. feet and covering every inch of forest land available. After adding paved drives, pool and decking, it leaves little forest land left to absorb the heavy rains including run off from the roofs. There are many sink holes along the sea walls and understand they are from improper drainage of water. Need a smaller footprint and more open area for run off. These problems need correcting. A! Zichella - WCI - CBIA - He is confused about the "Truth in Advertising". Those that are building or developing land are quite clear about what is in the code already. There is no confusion on the staff' s part as far as what is allowed and not allowed. The confusion among the general public is because of the varying heights of the FEMA max. Starting from FEMA is fair and an equitable way of measuring height for everyone. If height is changed, the property value is changed. He favors option #1 - leave as is. Not confusing and not unfairly applied. He discussed the parking issues and would like to see more green space. R.L. Caron -Wiggins Bay & Vice President of North Bay Civic Assn. - he discussed doing nothing to the present development code and disclosing the true building height in the application process. It would cost nothing. Measure from the road to the top of the building. They would choose Option #1 or support option #2. Donna Reed Caron - Wiggins Pass & President Wiggins Bay Villas & member of North Bay civic Assn. - she mentioned the BCC can change the Zoning heights anytime they wish. She feels the purpose is to get some "Truth in Advertising". When they give the zone height she would like to know the actual height - citizens can analyze and discuss intelligently what is being proposed in their neighborhoods. Property values are going up. She stated the City of Naples has no problem limiting their heights and not being sued by the Burt Harris law. Dwight Nadeau - RWA - he recommended to follow staffs recommendation and ~hange the definition of Building height. Should be measured from the first Page 10 November 3, 2003 finished floor. It does not give a loop hole. If it is measured from the required first finished floor, which is FEMA or DEP, then it would be measured according to the way it is intended to be measured. The Code does work. He gave an example of putting cars under the building if need be and additional open space. ~ - Gulfshore Drive - Director of Vanderbilt Beach & Bay Assn. & member of the Vanderbilt Zoning Committee - the Growth Management Plan in Collier County and the initial Land Development Code was written for & by the development. Now they need to look at it again. He stated staff is not looking at the reduction of density in the Growth Management Plan. He likes the Actual Height - they support it in saying "from the crown of the road to the tippy top of the building. ~ - local Architect - Disney & Assoc. - He likes what staff is recommending with option 2 and no action. He designs building based upon the heights and is very clear and understood at this time. Green space and parking under buildings is encouraged. His recollection for the City of Naples is that the height issues are primarily for Commercial - not residential. Property values are based on total building envelope height. He discussed conditional uses, and building code requirements. He felt "Truth in Advertising" means different things to different people. Brad Schiffer - Palm Beach uses a system he discussed and gave a slide presentation on. He showed different angles, widths and degrees in setbacks. Palm Beach also has vertical massing angles. He would like staff get together and see if this is something they would be interested in. Dou_gp.g_F.~ - North Bay Civic - He used an example of building heights being brought down at one of the Planning Commission meetings and watched the Planning Commissioners themselves try to figure how high the building was. No one seemed to know the actual height. The Wiggins Pass Marina PUD building height is proposed 225 feet. The citizens have asked at several meetings, the actual height of the building when built, to date he has not been given the answer. Mr. Schmitt commented going from FEMA to grade - found it created many issues and wondered where the Commissioners wanted staff to go from here on the LDC Amendments. Commissioner Coyle favored "Truth in Advertising". - City of Naples does not have height limitations for residential buildings. The County would not do anything to impact the value of homes. Run off of mega homes can be handled. All sorts of drainage systems can be put in. Page 11 November 3, 2003 Lower level parking is essential. Massing of buildings - multi-family - Commissioner Coletta supported Commissioner Coyle's remarks. Commissioner Halas would like staff talk with Brad Schiffer on side angles. Drainage needs to be addressed as a serious problem. The residents didn't say anything about changing codes or FEMA; they just want to know the real height of the building. (From the crown of the road) The majority went with Option//2, existing grade and crown of road, will show two heights and keep parking option viable. There being no further business for the good of the Cotmty, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chair at 12:35 PM. COLLIER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WORKSHOP Chairman Comm~]~ing These minutes approved by the Board on __ or as corrected , as presented Page 12