SMART GROWTH COMMITTEE
January
21, 2009 Minutes
Smart Growth
Time and Place: Wednesday,
January 21, 2009 from 6-8 p.m., 1st Floor, Lee County
Administration Building, 2115 Second Street, Fort Myers, Florida.
1.
Call to Order, Introductions,
Review of Agenda
Chairman Hammond
called the meeting of the Lee County Smart Growth (SG) Advisory
Committee to order at 6:09 p.m. He welcomed Mr. Fluegel, Planner
Consultant.
The following committee members in
attendance:
Ms. Jill Tyrer
Ms. Ellen Lindblad
Ms. Carie Call
Mr. Lee Ford
Ms. Margaret Fineberg
Mr. Ron Hamel
Dr. Bill Hammond
Dr. Margaret Banyan
Ms. Whitney Gray
Mr. Walter Fluegel
Mr. Robert Chilmonik
The following committee members
excused absence:
Ms. Liz Paul
Mr. Neal Noethlich
Mr. Jack Luft
Mr. Damon Romanello
The following staff in attendance:
Wayne Daltry, Director of Smart
Growth
John Fredyma, County Attorney
Lucy Crook, Recording Secretary
2. Administrative Matters
A.
Minutes of November 19,
2008.
Action Needed: Accept and approve the
minutes as amended by discussion of the members.
Dr. Banyan
asked for correction on Page 2, 8th Paragraph should be
changed to (Ms. Fineberg arrived at 7:20 p.m.); seconded by
Mr. Hamel to accept with correction. Called and carried.
B.
Resolution of Appreciation of Brian Griffin
(attached).
Action Needed: Consider developing
and approving a Resolution of Appreciation for Brian Griffin.
Mr. Daltry
said he passed away Thanksgiving Day. The attached Resolution was
approved by the Board of County Commissioners. You may wish to draft
one using your own words, leaving the mechanics and formatting to staff
(Ms. Fineberg arrived at 6:15 p.m.). Or, would the Committee
prefer to sponsor Mr. Griffin’s nomination for the Paulette Burton
Lee County Award?
Ms. Call
made a motion to nominate Mr. Griffin for the Paulette Burton Citizen
Award; seconded by Mr. Fluegel; called and carried.
Mr. Daltry
asked to email any information to include in the application by tomorrow
to meet the Friday deadline. There was discussion about many of the
community issues Brian Griffin and Kathy Malone were involved in and how
very much he will be missed.
3. Discussion
A.
Work Plan for Code Review
(Attached)
The task needed is to reaffirm the
outcomes wanted from the Codes which would guide the review. Examples
in the past include the policies of the plan for mixed use, the
intrusions of McMansion’s, and the relation of code to budgeting
relating to incomplete infrastructure. The obvious inapplicable codes
are left off of the checklist.
Next he referred to the
Summary of
County Codes & Ordinances. This shows the task involved under the
review of the Administrative Code of Ordinance and the Land Development
Code.
He reviewed the Work Plan Code
Review handout summarizing each phase and said he should have the
first part finished by March 2009.
Co-Chairman Hammond
introduced and welcomed School Board member Mr. Chilmonik.
Mr. Daltry
agreed with Co-Chairman Hammond with the prevalent employee
turnover in government and 75% of retirees reaching retirement in the
next ten years, the loss of institutional memory and the original
interpretation of codes may be lost unless those retiring “pass the
torch”. Discussed:
·
The importance of including
a context of strategy in each section of Codes (why and what are we
trying to get from it) with each adopted policy.
·
Mr. Hamel
suggested spending time only with the codes relevant to SG. (Ms.
Lindblad arrived at 6:25 p.m.)
There was discussion on how current are
codes: A concern that Lee
County Codes are behind; use past performance in other Counties as a
measure of credibility; and create innovations that basic codes
prohibit.
Combining issues under an umbrella:
1) Affordable Housing – will take a lot of code changes to implement
comprehensive plan changes that mix uses to help workforce housing. Need
to reform code, not ignore it and pursue mixed use code; 2) Escalating
demands of energy preparation - the state passed the energy bill last
year affecting 2008 code updates. Energy use reduction affects every
component of construction, i.e.; 10% energy use reduction in 2007 built
one house, 20% in 2010, and 30% in 2013. Energy used in construction is
the biggest producer of greenhouse gas.
Co-Chairman Hammond
talked about other areas in the country where developers are creating
competition when building 50% more energy and water conservative homes.
Price points are not different for the first 70% of efficiency. In
looking at Kyoto kinds of things agriculture communities can get those
offsets by doing credits in own community by trading with other
interests that produce green infrastructure. The key is to get credits
that trade internationally.
·
There was more discussion
and Mr. Daltry said he will research how to calculate the value
of carbon credits.
Discussion continued on impacts of
Code of Law and Ordinance that
reference the design of storm water, land use, or transportation. Mr.
Daltry talked about the vision and looking at arterial roads. Most
of the work is in the Land Development Codes. Community Planning needs
to be looked at case by case. With the current community designs in
place it will mean going back to the Code Books.
·
Dr. Banyan
asked approval to collaborate with the university to give students
experience in attacking some of the issues and help to take some of the
work from Mr. Daltry who agreed.
Identifying the Work Plan Steps
– Mr. Daltry explained that by
accepting the list, he can quote that SG wants this accomplished. The
steps are: 1) Ten SG Principles; 2) Expand the lead plan
to incorporate the SG policy; 3) Use policies to check to see if
they are implemented in the SG Check List; and 4) work with the
budget to include financial incentives.
Ms.
Gray made a motion to
endorse the Work Plan (mentioned above); seconded by Ms. Fineberg
for discussion. Called and carried. It was unanimous.
B.
Incentives for Infill and Redevelopment
(Attached)
Mr. Daltry
reviewed each section of the handout - a) difficulties for
developers because there is very little integration within communities
(not able to start with a blank slate) and the issue with domination of
surrounding land users. This is where density and financial incentives
could be added in the policy; b) propose proactive approaches by
partnering with private sector, school board, transportation and more
and; c) grants for infrastructure with Human Services, etc.,
tailor impact fees to be less costly and review financial incentives
list.
Mr. Chilmonik
suggested studying core area sprawl in other parts of the country to
find incentives for small/light manufacturers. Mr. Daltry said
Economic Development would work with county departments to retool
existing structures such as the School Boards building on Fowler. During
discussion examples were given where developers are stopped in their
track because communities will not accept density. Mr. Daltry
talked about under the planning process the County could promote land
uses in established areas for job centers through Community Planning
effort for mixed use redevelopment probably under current Code. There
are 17 Community Planning Districts. Mr. Fluegel said the mixed
use developer is looking for the infill parcels. They have got to have
enough market to go vertical. He referred to the East Coast where in the
past the infill parcels were the worst for the developers. Could shorten
the time frame and give more surety in the process. It needs to be a
form based code to get through the process quickly. Mr. Loveland
agreed. Staff is not available to design sites. It is helpful to have
the project engineer and property owner give a preliminary review to
highlight red flags to staff. Currently, there is a voluntary informal
review process that could become more formal. There was more discussion
about using an appointed liaison group with technical expertise as done
with Six Mile Cypress to head off a lot of problems.
How far can we incentivise?
Mr. Daltry referred to the sketches Joe Beck, Landscape
Architect, did for N. Fort Myers and other communities presented
previously in a slide show to SG and explained how productive it would
be to have a county person sketch ideas for staff and neighborhood
groups. Form based code means you show the form and what codes are being
violated. Mr. Loveland explained staff has many priorities and
little money to support this.
Bike Paths
have been stalled because no impact fee money and there are limitations
with gas tax money, and grants, etc. Mr. Daltry talked about
fiscal will be less in 2010 planning cycle - cannot keep doing the same
things the same way.
Mass transit limited by size of
development. There was talk
about bus stop perks and the County Plan moving in the direction of
highlighting transit corridors and identifying transit area in high
density. Mr. Daltry reminded all on the SG to Do List is Transit
Division to support mixed use, targeting nodes for a corridor system and
referred to the past Dade County Power Point presentation. Mr.
Loveland said the State Planners Conference was promoting more
walkability, mass transit and less about density. Metropolitan Planning
Agency (MPO) is in the process of creating a Transit Authority, but
there is a funding issue. Other counties have not done well funding with
sales tax referendum sources countywide.
Mobility Fee alternative to Impact Fee.
Mr. Loveland answered Dr. Banyan that there are barriers
in Lee about some impact fees going towards transit and explained that
Broward County does this. Fees would not be used for road widening, but
applied to a smaller geographic Multi-Mobile Transportation area as well
as pay for other modes of transportation. He said with significant
change in policy, it could be possible. There was discussion:
improving mobility instead of widening would be data intensive to create
the area. In Dade it took three years.
Local
Business cannot survive.
Mr. Ford reiterated his
concern with city officials and with him trying to convince the City of
Fort Myers officials to offer assistance, especially during this
economical time. It is SG’s job to ask the question and find where the
issues are. Should bring staff and business together to discuss where
the issues are.
Homework
Assignment. Mr. Daltry suggested bringing businesses most experienced with
the County who have expanded their business to a SG meeting. In talking
with Jim Moore, Economic Director, his priority is concerned with
keeping businesses here. (Of course there is the issue of the client
having to deal with Department of Community Development (DCD)). Horizon
Council’s job is to bring industry in, instead they rely more on having
a study done.
There was a lengthy discussion and the
following was decided:
Co-Chairman Hammond
Outlined Upcoming Tasks: 1)
Mr. Daltry received endorsement from SG to work on Code; 2) bring
the business community in to give their insight; and 3) ask three
Committee Chairs from the Horizon Council to join in discussion.
Ms.
Call requested Mr. Loveland
to return. She said she and others are interested with Transit and
D.O.T.’s opinion on encouraging transit corridors. Mr. Loveland
agreed to return.
Workshop
Mode: The Committee agreed to
go with more than one meeting a month. This way he will schedule a two
hour topic for each workshop.
C. The interface of Infill and
Redevelopment, with Complete Streets
– Will continue.
4. Task Progress
A. Member Issues:
Discussed above.
B. Updates:
Discussed above.
5.
Public Comment:
·
Mr. Dan Moser
hopes SG plans to make recommendations on what paved shoulders to
designate as bike lanes. He explained that there is much hinging on it.
Co-Chairman Hammond said that will be covered under 3. C.
Complete Streets.
·
Mr. Joe Beck,
Registered Landscape Architect, said form based code is the way to go.
6.
Set next meeting (February 18th); identify agenda items, and
Adjourn.
·
Issues – Mr. Daltry: 1)
Complete Streets - Walkable
Community; 2) Invite Horizon Council subcommittee chairs
to a SG Workshops; and 3) He will frame the topics for
members to respond and send back to him for the workshop agenda.
Co-Chairman
Hammond entertained a
motion to adjourn at 8:25 p.m.; seconded by Ms. Fineberg. Called
and carried.
Respectfully
submitted by:
Lucy Crook, Administrative Specialist
Lee County Administration
1.
Minutes
2.
Financial Incentives
3.
Summary of County Codes & Ordinances
4.
Work Plan Code Review
5.
Incentives for Infill and Redevelopment
Lee
