MINUTES
SMART GROWTH
June 20, 2007
MINUTES
Time and Place:
Wednesday, June 20, 2007 at 6-8 p.m., 1st
Floor, Lee County Administration Building at 2115 Second Street, Fort
Myers, Florida.
I.
Call to Order, Introductions, Review of Agenda
Chair Griffin opened the meeting of the
Lee County Smart Growth Advisory Committee at 6:00 p.m.
The following committee members in
attendance:
Ms. Whitney Gray
Ms. Carie Call
Mr. Brian Griffin
Ms. Ellen Lindblad
Mr. Neal Noethlich
Mr. Damon Romanello
Mr. Matthew Caldwell
Dr. Margaret Banyan
Ms. Liz Paul
Ms. Jill Tyrer
Mr. Jack Luft
The following committee members
excused absence:
Mr. Steven Teuber
Ms. Liz Donley
Dr. Bill Hammond
Mr. Ron Hamel
The following committee member’s
unexcused absence:
Mr. Lee Ford
The following staff in attendance:
Commissioner Ray Judah- Excused
Absence
Wayne Daltry, Director of Smart Growth
Donald D. Stilwell, County Manager
Tim Jones, County Attorney
Lucy Crook, Recording Secretary
II.
Administrative Matters
A.
Approved the draft minutes of
May 16, 2007.
Action Needed: Accept and approve the
minutes as amended by discussion of the member.
MOTION - Whitney Gray moved to accept the minutes; Jack Luft seconded.
Neal Noethlich referenced Page 3, Public Presentation; Peggy Schmidt
stated that we are “going to run out of aggregate” and it should read
“not run out of aggregate.” Page 4, the spelling should be
Rosenthal. Chair Griffin asked to accept the draft minutes with
corrections. It was unanimous.
III.
Discussion
A.
“Turning around Downtown” (tentative)
– Will be moved to another meeting.
Under Public Comment – Carman Monroy, Lee
Tran announced Lee Tran is asking everyone to ride transit for free to
experience how it works. (Ms. Tyrer arrived at 6:04 p.m.).
B.
Summary of DRGR review (Summary
attached)
Mr. Daltry summarized the Executive
Draft Summary prepared by McLain & Associates (see attachment) and
asked the committee to consider the Commissioner’s request for a more
proactive management approach to managing the DRGR. BoCC asked if Smart
Growth Committee would host and sponsor public stakeholder meetings for
DRGR during July 2007. When the BoCC returns in August, 2007, they can
be informed of what the public’s response is and from that point it will
direct staff for special planning focus. He referred to page 51 and then
to Conclusions on page 61. Mainly it is the effect on ground
water caused by certain land uses where they specifically state mining.
The following includes some of the
discussion: There was
disappointment that the report did not offer recommendations, no guides
to trade off’s, etc. It emphasized that no matter what will be decided,
it will cause an impact on the environment. Mr. Daltry said it is
validated, and displayed a large map of DRGR in the red outline. It is
not a static system to date; does not forecast a need for real
absorption of these lands in growth in 2030 to meet population forecast
of 375,000 people; (intensity and density can absorb the next 375,000
people); overall forecast dropped in rural estates 1 unit to 10 and 20
residential; demand is not needed to be met in DRGR; there are projects
proposed or coming that are not static systems; there is active
agriculture; golf courses are allowable use; conservation activities
allowed with mitigation banks that are doing well outside and within the
DRGR.
Mining:
Mr. Daltry referenced the map - with green being conservation, pale
yellow residential and purple mining there are speculations (no
guarantee’s) of conversions with the DRGR lands from one unit per 10
acre to urban (one acre and up); densities in the blue areas have no
plan amendments to date.
He referred to
Planning in the DRGR,
attached, and continued to summarize the handout. Mr. Daltry explained
that there are allowable uses; referred to A. Current Residential
Etimate and Forecasted Growth in the DRGR and the requirement to
drive a Comprehensive Plan, (population growth). It is not an “Urban
Organized Plan” to date, but identifies the current Management
Structure. Under B., there are restrictions on land uses with
provisions on County infrastructure which will ensure lower density. A
study is underway to bring a road into Lehigh. He talked about
agriculture use and water management.
Under Mining
consumptive use permits are needed. The County regulates handling
ancillary impacts of mining and pieces not covered by Water Management
such as permitting. There has been discovery of many holes in the
regulatory scheme where mining is not fitting without adverse and
secondary impacts, (referenced phosphate mining on the Peace River).
There is substantial documentation that the permit system is broken in
regards to phosphate mining. One can see aggregate becoming a regional
market with the ongoing demand for it. He discussed other entities
involved; US Fish & Wildlife and FDEP, etc. He referred to page 3 D.
for issues to consider sponsoring and establishing a subcommittee to
work with him to refine stakeholder questions for a meeting. Mr. Daltry
confirmed that a County goal would be an activist county program pursued
in DRGR linked back to study DRGR and resources important to County and
Policies.
Mr. Daltry reviewed E 1-8. He
noted that unlike MPO’s Transportation Model, this system does not have
a common system planning tool for Water Management that would enable
developers and agencies to access different proposals.
Discussed 2020 and public access.
Mr. Stilwell said the County will have 13 percent less money from
property taxes than last year; 2020 is 10% - ($43 million off of 2020),
and this is why more counties are looking at bed tax.
StakeholderWorkshop:
http://www.lee-county.com/Publicresources/Autopage_T1_R231.htm
There are five major interest groups; Residential, Agriculture, Mining,
Environmental and General Public (cannot isolate water usage by general
public). Some of the discussion was: difficult for one or two meetings
to result in policy; may need ongoing consensus building effort after
the stakeholder meetings; may create a usable policy; and if not
undertaken it would be a failed mission. Dr. Banyan said a public
workshop could be risky; to consider using a tool for online survey to
get fast results; concerned this is a study based on other studies; are
we comfortable with science discussion when the answers will not be
there; we are not taking study out to public, but taking to public what
science says; stakeholders meeting will allow formal recommendations to
be addressed with an end result being policy recommendation. E.4.
was referred to addressing policy and a need for a series of stakeholder
meetings.
Some of the discussion on how to promote
the Stakeholders meeting:
contact active groups; miners, citizens; post notice and include the
working report; use forum to know who cares to be involved and what are
their pursuits; solicit online surveys for quick report. Dr. Banyan said
Oregon Solutions model is good to follow. This model does come to
consensus and it works.
(Break at 7:02 and returned at 7:13 p.m.
– Mr. Stilwell departed)
Discussion continued with preparation for
the Stakeholders meeting: Mr.
Daltry confirmed there was no need to consider hiring a consensus
builder with Dr. Banyan’s expertise; necessary to find a date and
preliminary online questionnaire; need concrete goal with no impact or
reform to take to public; it is only necessary to present the case to
BoCC; need to gather information to present to BoCC and seek input
through a sub committee of SG to host the stakeholders meeting, (with
probable attendance of the Commissioners). Mr. Luft summarized steps to
prepare for hosting and forming a subcommittee with an Ad Hoc process of
decision making in the absence of land use, infrastructure,
public/private space planning. There is a need to sort priorities
starting with the science to find the best case scenarios with
mitigating land use projects; residential development, etc. Smart Growth
Committee can apply principals to devise a strategy to make the best
judgments for the broader community.
Chair Griffin asked to move to Agenda
Item V. Public Comment.
V.
Public Comment
Kathy Malone-Council of Civic
Association, Steven Brown-Conservancy, Pete Quasius- Audubon, Dan
Moser-State, Dave Urich-RAMC, Tom Hart-KCEHS and Angela Mitrisin-Conservancy
were present. Some of what was said follows: agreed with Mr. Luft;
looking for suggestions to come up with regulations for mining before
the State preempts goals; agrees that stakeholders should come up with
solutions; biggest mistake made was to let mining continue as approved
activity without knowing the second source of aggregate in Florida;
struggling with mining claim report; mining is target with DRGR; report
did not state mining is the problem; did not do dye test and will need
information of the problem for in depth discussion; scientific
information not there; may need another study.
Chair Griffin said there was no objection
and asked Mr. Daltry to move ahead with sub committee. Mr. Daltry asked
Mr. Luft if he would Chair the subcommittee.
Some of the discussion on Stakeholders
meeting criteria: Two
additional meetings in July after the 4th; survey timeline;
still have regular SG meeting July 18th; email suggestions to
Mr. Daltry; decide to meet in DRGR area at 6:00 p.m.; discussed criteria
of open survey – three to four questions with multiple choice; tentative
July 25th Stakeholders meeting date; send to property owners,
civic, agriculture groups, identify stakeholders; subcommittee will be
any members who wish to come; subcommittee could meet July 2 from
4:00-6:00 p.m. to identify questionnaire, etc.; mailings take too long;
Mr. Luft confirmed that Dr. Banyan would handle survey; talked about
ways to notify the public.
Mr. Caldwell said the science of impact
from mines is necessary before going forward with a workshop. Mr.
Daltry said the County has three studies to choose from to provide the
recommendation.
After more discussion Mr. Daltry
confirmed the tentative meeting dates:
The BoCC will hear SG Stakeholders DRGR
recommendations at a Board meeting, August 8 or the 15th,
2007. July 2-Subcommittee meets; July 25 Stakeholders meeting with
August 1 as a backup date; July 18th will be a regular SG
meeting.
IV.
Task Progress – No
discussion
A. Member Issues
1. Overbuilding for the
Lot
B. Other progress reports
V.
Public Comment – Moved to above.
VI.
Set next meeting date (July 18), identify agenda items, and
Adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
Respectfully
submitted by:
Lucy Crook
Recording Secretary
County Administration
