Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes_Local Planning Agency_05/10/2007MINUTES VILLAGE OF TEQUESTA LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY MEETING TEQUESTA VILLAGE HALL THURSDAY, MAY 10, 2007 7:00 P.M. (Regular Village Council Meeting to Immediately Follow LPA Meeting) I. Call to Order and Roll Call The Local Planning Agency Meeting was called to order by Mayor Jim Humpage at 7:02 p.m. Present were: Mayor Jim Humpage, Vice Mayor Pat Watkins, Council Member Dan Amero, Council Member Tom Paterno, and Council Member Calvin Turnquest. Also in attendance were: Village Attorney Scott Hawkins, Village Manager Michael R. Couzzo, Jr., Village Clerk Lori McWilliams, and Department Heads. Mayor Humpage noted the Regular Council Meeting would follow immediately after the Local Planning Meeting. III. Approval of Agenda MOTION: Vice Mayor Watkins moved to approve the Local Planning Agency Agenda; Council Member Turnquest seconded the motion; motion passed 5-0. III. Public Hearing 1. Resolution 47-06/07 - A Resolution of the Village Council of the Village of Tequesta, Palm Beach County, Florida, adopting the Evaluation and Appraisal Report for the Comprehensive Plan of the Village of Tequesta; stating the intent of the Village Council to amend the Comprehensive Plan based upon recommendations contained in the report; and approving transmittal of the report to the Department of Community Affairs in accordance with Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes; and providing for an effective date. a) Chair announces Local Planning Agency Public Hearing is open b) Comments from Planning Consultant c) Public Comment d) Agency Comment e) Chair announces Local Planning Agency Public Hearing is closed f) Recommendation Mr. Hawkins read Resolution 47-06/07 into the record. Mayor Humpage announced the Local Planning Agency Public Hearing was open and asked if there were any public comments. Mayor Humpage asked what the new development was and Ms. Genco stated she had a list at home and stated she did not expect this to be on the agenda and was therefore not prepared. Mayor Humpage stated this was a draft and Council had eighteen months to revise the document. Local Planning Agency Meeting May 10, 2007 Page 2 of 7 III. Public Hearing 1. Resolution 47-06/07 Ms. Genco, 7 Country Club Circle, stated regarding the Comp Plan she noticed there were a number of issues that were not updated in the Plan such as the Cypress Drive drainage; notations regarding the CRS (Community Rating System) ISO (FEMA Flood Insurance Plan) and mentioned that as of the end of February, the Village had decided to drop this coverage. She felt there were a number of errors within the document and suggested the errors be corrected if the document was to be adopted. She pointed out new development was not listed in the Comp Plan Amendment. Mayor Humpage asked what new development Ms. Genco was referring to and she stated she had the list at home and had not expected this to be on the agenda because it was not listed on the website and was therefore not prepared. Mayor Humpage stated this was a draft and Council had eighteen months to revise the document. (Comments from Planning Consultant) Mr. Jack Horniman, President of JLH Associates stated the purpose of the meeting this evening was for approval of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the existing Comprehensive Plan and did not constitute a Comp Plan Amendment. The next step was to assess the Plan, element by element, and transmit it to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for their review. He stated the Village had 60 days to comply and that after 60 days the Village would receive a sufficiency letter that stated the Village had met the requirements sufficiently enough to evaluate the Comp Plan. He noted that once the Village received this letter then the Village would have 18 months to amend the Comp Plan. The document that was distributed to Council was not the Comp Plan Amendment, but the Evaluation and Appraisal Report. He stated compilation of data and data collection had to be cut off at some point in order to prepare the report and the existing land use information was cut off as of December 2006. He explained an existing land use was if it was actually on the ground; if approvals were given but it was not built, then it would be reported as vacant. Mayor Humpage noted that this was the date suggested by Mr. Horniman and the stormwater had not been started. (Agency Comments) Council Member Paterno asked about a comment made by Ms. Genco regarding CRS, page 25, and understood this application had not been completed. Mr. Horniman was not aware of this, but Ms. Harding just explained the issue to him and that the Village was going to be reinstated. Council Member Amero stated he was not sure the Village could be reinstated since they missed the window and it would depend on lobbying efforts. Local Planning Agency Meeting May 10, 2007 Page 3 of 7 III. Public Hearing 1. Resolution 47-06/07 Ms. Catherine Harding, Director of Community Development, stated a Memo was sent to Mr. Couzzo explaining the situation with the CRS. She stated she had attended all the CRS meetings in order the keep up with this issue. She explained the Building Department maintained all the requirements for FEMA regarding flood protection and keeps up with any requirements. She stated that as of May 1, resulting from Mr. Couzzo's request for Community Development to review the rating system requirements and pursue the Village's participation in the CRS program, she read the following synopsis into the record: "The documentation of the CRS had not been maintained by her predecessor and they were advised that the rating would be lowered unless the Village could provide additional documentation. Since that work had not performed it was not possible to document. Back in 2007 she had a conversation with Mr. Bob Durham in Atlanta, and discussed the community rating system and the merits of the program for Tequesta. She discussed the cost benefits of the CRS program with Susan Wilson, of FEMA, in January 2007 of which they found the resident policyholder savings did not warrant the amount of documentation necessary to keep a reasonable rating. Nor did she have the staff to maintain the required documentation without sacrificing valuable time needed to service the community with our other responsibilities. Her conversation with Bob Durrin recognizes that the other smaller communities have drawn the same conclusion and with limited staff felt it was not cost feasible. Mr. Durrin did say that a secondary benefit of the CRS program was that it helped communities organize their flood management efforts as an organizational tool. She stated they would attempt to resume their participation in the CRS and Mr. Durrin would assist the Village in this effort and possibly have the Village of Tequesta restored by October 2007. This was a positive offer and would like to take advantage of the offer and Mr. Couzzo agreed." Ms. Harding noted there had been a slight hiatus with the Village being a member, the Village had not dropped any of the requirements and this would represent approximately $23 per 200 policy holders within community. She had a complete read out of all policyholders that qualified and stated not everyone had the insurance to start with and of those only a few would receive the benefit. She stated if a benefit were received, Mr. Couzzo would like to pursue continued participation. Council Member Amero heard it would affect approximately 900 residents and felt the EAR called for the Village as a governmental entity to continue its support of the insurance program and asked Mr. Horniman if Council would be able to discuss participation and had questions. Local Planning Agency Meeting May 10, 2007 Page 4 of 7 III. Public Hearing 1. Resolution 47-06/07 Ms. Harding stated it would be beneficial if Mr. Horniman were allowed to explain to the public what the EAR report was and when Council understood the report, there would be a vast opportunity for comments to be addressed and basically the EAR report evaluated the current status and projecting if Council needed to change, remain the same or improve. Vice-Mayor Watkins clarified the Planning Agency needed to adopt this in order to move forward and Ms. Harding advised this was a path through the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) to begin the process in which a report was required every five years. The Evaluation Report tells DCA that the Village has adopted a Plan and complied with the commitments in the Plan. She stated this evaluated the Village's current status. Council Member Amero asked if once adopted if Council would be afforded the opportunity to discuss their recommendations and changes in a workshop setting and Ms. Harding advised yes that there was a window of eighteen months. She stated it would be effective in approximately 60 days when the EAR report was accepted as worthwhile, the DCA would send the Plan back with their recommendations. She explained Council would take those recommendations and work with Council and the community in public meetings to discuss the Plan and what it meant to the community. She reiterated this simply opened the doorway for the process to begin and was not a new Plan and was not changing the Plan; it was an evaluation and not a commitment. Attorney Hawkins suggested Mr. Horniman provide a brief report to technically follow the guidelines. Mr. Jack Horniman provided a brief synopsis. He stated the EAR process did not require updating the whole Plan and stated there were certain things the State wanted to see such as updated land use, housing affordability issues addressed, and population projections. He stated the first thing that needed to be done was an update on the population estimates and at the present time, the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Florida publishes official population estimates each April and as of 2005 Tequesta had a population of 5,900 year round residents; not including seasonal residents. He stated if the DCA accepted this report, the Village would be in a position to ask BEBR to re-look at the numbers for revenue sharing purposes. He explained another major area was to update the existing land use; what was actually on the ground today. He stated 99% of the Village was developed and an added 18 acres had been brought in through annexation for approximately 1456 total acres in the Village. He commented primary use of land was residential and was primarily single-family detached units. Local Planning Agency Meeting May 10, 2007 Page 5 of 7 III. Public Hearing 1. Resolution 47-06/07 Mr. Horniman explained another issue was water as recreation only space and in past years the Village increased the amount of recreation open space acreage. He noted there was some misreporting last time and until there are open space areas such as the drainage easements those could be factored in as open space. He stated these were positive issues that came out of the analysis. He mentioned he had to prepare a new existing land use count and was up-to- date as of December 2006; future land use projections were not required, however since the Village was 99% developed it was easy to project. He noted the Village would basically be built out within afive-year period; however population, or actual occupancy, would occur in the fifth and tenth years. He discussed housing affordability as a major issue and noted the University of Florida did a housing assessment of every city in State, which identified all the cost burdens. He explained cost burden as if a resident spent more than 30% of their gross income on housing and housing related costs, they had a cost burden; and if they spent between 30% and 50% there was a severe cost burden; which included taxes and insurance. He advised 73% of households in Tequesta had no cost burden as of 2005. He recommended three approaches to affordable housing. First, he encouraged the Village to adopt a policy stressing the importance of maintaining good housing codes and ensuring they were enforced. This would keep the quality of the existing housing stock at a good level. Secondly, he suggested allowing more density in which developers could build smaller units -smaller units equate to less costly units. Lastly, with 99% of Tequesta being developed the Village could support the countywide effort and lend its population to the County Community Development Block Grant to help build a bigger pool to bring more money into the County. Mr. Horniman noted the Village just obtained a new consumptive use permit for capacities for the next 20 years through year 2026. The large service area could become an issue in the future because service standards would have to be developed. He stated central sewer was available to everyone, however approximately 20 lots were not connected. He stated the Village was doing its part regarding storm water and was a participant in the Storm water and Permitting Program and adopted effective regulations to enforce the level of service standards. He briefly mentioned conservation and coastal zone maintenance and intergovernmental coordination. He mentioned capital improvements were assessed and needs were identified and came to the conclusion that the Plan was financially feasible. He reviewed the expenditures and noted there was a $9.5 million general fund budget; a $6 million Water Utility Fund; plenty of revenues were demonstrated in the report; and a five and ten year schedule was adopted. He concluded that based on the revenue streams and the investment portfolio, the Village was fiscally sound. He commented on public schools and how the Village received an exemption from school siting and co-location requirements, which was still in effect; the Village was also part of countywide concurrency. Local Planning Agency Meeting May 10, 2007 Page 6 of 7 III. Public Hearing 1. Resolution 47-06/07 He stated regional water would be a large deal in the future and that the Village would have to select alternative water sources; in essence the Village had already completed this with the consumptive use permit. He stated the overall assessment of the Plan was good and it would be an eighteen-month process to complete. He advised the bottom line was the Village had more than met the minimum requirements required by Florida Statutes and Florida Administrative Code to address the items in the EAR. He noted the important step was to get it transmitted into the process so that the Village could move forward with Comp Plan Amendments, annexation of properties, applied land use, etc. Mayor Humpage stated he would like to this report transmitted and stated he spoke with FEMA regarding the CRS. He looked at the number of homes and the value it brought to residents and hoped FEMA would revisit the cost burdens and requirements it placed on small municipalities. (Additional Public Comments) -None Vice-Mayor Watkins mentioned part of the problem was that the Planning Agency did not have a clear understanding that this was not a document they were accepting; however it was to open the process to study and move forward. Mayor Humpage announced the Public Hearing was closed and asked for a recommendation. MOTION: Vice-Mayor Watkins moved approval to adopt transmittal to the Department of Community Affairs; Council Member Turnquest seconded; motion carried 5-0. IV. New Business 2. Authorization to extend the Site Plan approval for Atlantis from June 8, 2007 to June 8, 2008 due to the real estate market conditions Ms. Catherine Harding, Director of Community Development, explained Atlantis ran into problems with selling properties and advancing the economic goals of the project. The developer asked for an additional year to try to sell project. Ms. Harding felt it was a worthwhile project for the community and if Atlantis lost its approval they would be eligible, under Village Ordinance, for aone-year renewal. MOTION: Council Member Amero moved to approve a one year extension site plan extension to Atlantis; seconded by Vice-Mayor Watkins; motion carried 5-0. Local Planning Agency Meeting May 10, 2007 Page 7 of 7 V. Adjournment MOTION: Vice-Mayor Watkins moved to adjourn the Local Planning Agency Meeting at 7: 37 p. m.; seconded by Council Member Amero; motion carried S-U. ,,~~~.i ~, ~ it t~~i~~~~ Respectfully submitted, ; ,•~ ~,,• > ; , , ,• i ~ ;vii • ~ Lori McWilliams, CMC ~'%~'~ `'~'F4~ 19;'.~'O~~ Village Clerk ~~~ij ~OF F i ~~~ ~~~