Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

9/8 THUR 14:30 | Regulatory Re-think


Published on

Nicki van Vonno
Daniel Holbrook
Joshua Long
Rebecca Miller

The session will explore the complex task of balancing business and community values through the regulatory review process. In the climate of making governmental development review process more ‘business friendly,’ it is vital not to lose sight of why regulations and process were created. With a hint of theoretical reasoning and practical experience, hear how different groups
have initiated change on local and regional levels from both the public and private sectors to re-think regulatory process. Several of these initiatives are still ongoing and will welcome your thoughts to the debate. So can we streamline and not lose our

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

9/8 THUR 14:30 | Regulatory Re-think

  1. 1. Regulatory Re-think – Balancing Business and Community Values 2011 APA FLORIDA ANNUAL CONFERENCE 2:30p - 3:45p September 8, 2011
  2. 2. Overview <ul><li>Introduction </li></ul><ul><li>Review of Initiatives </li></ul><ul><ul><li>City of Port St. Lucie </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Martin County </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>St. Lucie County </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Palm Beach County </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Questions and Answers </li></ul>
  3. 3. Panelist <ul><li>Daniel L. Holbrook , AICP, City of Port St. Lucie </li></ul><ul><li>Nicki B. van Vonno , AICP, Martin County </li></ul><ul><li>Rebecca Miller , St. Lucie County EDC, </li></ul><ul><li>Miller Permitting and Land Development, LLC </li></ul><ul><li>Joshua I. Long , AICP, Gunster, P.A. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Presenter’s Review <ul><ul><li>Set local stage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Activities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Products </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Best/worst practices </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Why do we plan? Why do we regulate? Quality of life.. Livability... Life safety... Can you explain that to the public? Sustainablity...
  6. 6. “ There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. Because the innovator has for enemies all those who have done well under the old conditions, and lukewarm defenders in those who may do well under the new.” Machiavelli, 1515 WARNING
  7. 7. Einstein’s 3 rules of work <ul><li>Out of clutter, find simplicity </li></ul><ul><li>From discord, find harmony </li></ul><ul><li>In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity </li></ul>
  8. 8. Community Values <ul><li>Residents </li></ul><ul><li>Businesses </li></ul><ul><li>Tourists </li></ul><ul><li>Environment </li></ul><ul><li>Others </li></ul>
  9. 9. Why should we re-think? <ul><li>Because chaos exists </li></ul><ul><li>Things change </li></ul><ul><li>How people utilize land changes </li></ul><ul><li>Budget cuts </li></ul><ul><li>Need to evaluate the effectiveness of regulations and process to the goals of the organization </li></ul>
  10. 10. “ The art of progress is to preserve order amid change and to preserve change amid order.” Alfred North Whitehead
  11. 11. <ul><li>Until 1950’s - Agriculture </li></ul><ul><li>1957 - First residents </li></ul><ul><li>1961 - City charter adopted (50 Sq. Miles) </li></ul><ul><li>2006 - Citywide utilities installation completed </li></ul>
  12. 12. <ul><li>City Stats </li></ul><ul><li>Population = 166,041 </li></ul><ul><li>Size = 114 sq. miles </li></ul><ul><li>Housing Units = 70,877 </li></ul><ul><li>Housing Vacancy Rates = 14.1% </li></ul><ul><li>Vacant Land = +26,000 acres </li></ul>
  13. 14. Port St. Lucie <ul><li>Actions </li></ul><ul><li>City Council approval for action plan </li></ul><ul><li>Self examination </li></ul><ul><li>Stake holder interviews </li></ul><ul><li>Research and analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Findings and recommendations </li></ul><ul><li>City Council update and direction </li></ul><ul><li>Implementation </li></ul>
  14. 15. Port St. Lucie <ul><li>New Codes </li></ul><ul><li>Tree Preservation </li></ul><ul><li>Dumpster/Recycling Enclosure </li></ul><ul><li>Create a single application fee for the City </li></ul><ul><li>Expanded uses in non-residential zoning districts </li></ul>
  15. 16. Port St. Lucie <ul><li>Educational </li></ul><ul><li>Land Development Process Training </li></ul><ul><li>New Business Training (English, Spanish, and Creole) </li></ul><ul><li>You Tube explanation videos </li></ul><ul><li>Pre-application meetings </li></ul><ul><li>Sufficiency Checklists </li></ul>
  16. 17. Port St. Lucie <ul><li>Organizational and Process Changes </li></ul><ul><li>Public Works and Engineering were combined and Utilities Engineering Services was relocated to the municipal complex. </li></ul><ul><li>Internal routing of permit reviews </li></ul><ul><li>Engineering now issues clearing permits instead of Building Dept. </li></ul><ul><li>Reduce staff review time </li></ul><ul><li>Negotiating a new Impact Fee agreement with the County </li></ul>
  17. 18. Port St. Lucie <ul><li>Using Technology </li></ul><ul><li>Website Updates </li></ul><ul><li>Online project tracking </li></ul><ul><li>Active development applications map </li></ul><ul><li>Online applications that you can type and save </li></ul><ul><li>Email staff comments vs. hard copy or fax </li></ul>
  18. 19. <ul><li>Best Practices </li></ul><ul><li>Use Technology </li></ul><ul><li>Identify problem areas </li></ul><ul><li>Customer Guidance Cards </li></ul><ul><li>Submittal Schedules </li></ul><ul><li>Its ok to experiment </li></ul><ul><li>Comprehensive input when re-thinking and upper management direction </li></ul><ul><li>Worst Practices </li></ul><ul><li>Multiple fees for one application </li></ul><ul><li>Requiring applicants to pick up their permits to transfer to another department </li></ul>Port St. Lucie
  19. 21. List of Schedules
  20. 22. Sufficiency Check List
  21. 26. Florida American Planning Association Chapter Annual Conference September, 2011 Martin County
  22. 27. Martin County: Enjoy Our Good Nature. <ul><li>In the forefront of Florida planning since the early 1970s when Martin County began to adopt environmental and development controls, and began acquiring conservation, beach and park lands. Strong proponent of growth management. </li></ul>Martin County
  23. 28. Martin County: Enjoy Our Good Nature. <ul><ul><li>four-story height limit countywide </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>an urban service district boundary that limits the area of urban development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>strong environmental regulations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Strong community activism </li></ul></ul>Martin County
  24. 29. Martin County: Enjoy Our BAD REP <ul><li>Known widely as: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Bureaucratic </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Difficult </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Slow </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Litigious </li></ul></ul><ul><li>In Response: </li></ul><ul><li>County Commissioners 2007 Strategic Objective: Reengineer the development review process </li></ul>Martin County
  25. 30. Activities to accomplish reengineering began in 2007 and still ongoing <ul><li>Work Plans that included quarterly updates to BCC; at one point weekly meetings with County Administrator. </li></ul><ul><li>Focus Group Meetings with development community. </li></ul><ul><li>Interviews of stakeholders, including staff and public. </li></ul><ul><li>Extensive staff involvement in reengineering activities. </li></ul><ul><li>Revisions to Codes, website, and applications. </li></ul><ul><li>Extensive training opportunities including LEAN Training attended by staff. </li></ul><ul><li>Development and monitoring of metrics. </li></ul>Martin County
  26. 31. Specific Work Products to Reengineer Review processes <ul><li>EAR based Amendments to Comprehensive Plan. </li></ul><ul><li>Expedited Processing of development applications </li></ul><ul><li>Reduced and revised Fees. </li></ul><ul><li>Implemented Permit Ready Industrial Parks, Small Business Bill of Rights (SBBOR) and LSTAR Ordinances. </li></ul><ul><li>Redesigned website and applications for easier use. </li></ul>Martin County
  27. 32. EAR Based Amendments to Comprehensive Growth Management Plan <ul><li>to promote balanced, orderly, sustainable economic growth …. The Economic Element is an integral part of the County’s Comprehensive Growth Management Plan (CGMP) and is not an isolated set of policies. This and other elements of the CGMP form a system of development management, which includes the CGMP, Land Development Regulations, and concurrency management necessary to achieve a principal goal of economic development. </li></ul>Martin County
  28. 33. Strengthened Objectives/Policies in Economic Element to: <ul><ul><li>Maintain and enhance programs for expansion of economic base. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide incentives and remove disincentives. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Promote economic diversity. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Continue to promote tourism. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Retain, expand, and recruit targeted businesses. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Commercial and industrial inventory. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Consider high priority of employment related sites when reviewing CPA, rezonings, and site plans. </li></ul></ul>Martin County Martin County
  29. 34. Objectives/Policies in FLUE to: <ul><li>Encourage renewable energy resources in all future land use designations. </li></ul><ul><li>Craft LDRs to guide mixed-use development in commercial areas outside CRAs. </li></ul><ul><li>Provide zoning districts for research and developmen t. </li></ul>Martin County
  30. 35. Revised Development Review Procedures in LDRs <ul><li>Eliminated Development Review Committee; replaced with Joint Workshops with applicant and internal review team meetings. </li></ul><ul><li>Added Sufficiency Check of applications. </li></ul><ul><li>Revised thresholds of projects. </li></ul><ul><li>Expanded list of activities that don’t require site plan approval. </li></ul><ul><li>Further reduced timeframes for targeted business projects within CRA areas, and green development. </li></ul>Martin County Martin County
  31. 36. Revised Development Review Procedures in LDRs continued <ul><li>Eliminated Master Plan requirement for Major Developments. </li></ul><ul><li>Allowed two re-submittals for projects to be approved: further review costs a re-submittal fee. </li></ul><ul><li>Allowed minor corrections to related documents without new submittals. </li></ul><ul><li>A three year one-time time extension approved via Ordinance assisted property owners as well. </li></ul>Martin County Martin County
  32. 37. Reduce (but not eliminate) Fees <ul><li>Adopted Impact Fee Schedule reduced non-residential fees by 31%. </li></ul><ul><li>DR fees updated and revised. </li></ul>Martin County
  33. 38. Expedited Processing for Economic Development Actions by BCC <ul><li>Cut staff review timeframes by 42 percent. </li></ul><ul><li>Done under separate BCC Strategic Objective on Economic Development. </li></ul><ul><li>Memo of Understanding ( MOU) with Florida Office of Tourism Trade and Economic Development ( OTTED) adopted 7/2008. </li></ul>Martin County Martin County
  34. 39. Small Business Bill of Rights <ul><li>Resulted in revisions to Zoning Code, Parking Standards and Adequate Public Facilities in LDRs. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Better defined changes in use. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Streamlined the requirements relating to traffic impacts, parking requirements, and impact fees. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reorganized parking LDR and updated traffic study section. </li></ul></ul>Martin County
  35. 40. LSTAR Zoning Code Change <ul><li>Identified life science and targeted businesses in multiple zoning districts, thereby eliminating rezoning process. </li></ul><ul><li>Allowed two options for development of LSTAR at final site plan review. </li></ul><ul><li>Allows alternative compliance to easily convert existing site to LSTAR project. </li></ul>Martin County
  36. 41. Revamped Web Site <ul><li>Establishment of web site </li></ul><ul><li>Consolidates all development review information </li></ul><ul><li>Provides easy to follow information required for permitting expansions and new facilities. </li></ul>Martin County
  37. 42. Martin County Means Business! Martin County Questions ?
  38. 43. FP&L Solar Facility <ul><li>First site plan application expedited under new streamlined process. </li></ul><ul><li>$480 million project. </li></ul><ul><li>Construction commenced December 2, 2008, with completion scheduled for the end of 2010. </li></ul><ul><li>1,000 construction jobs and several full time positions after completion. </li></ul>Martin County Martin County
  39. 44. River Forest Yachting Center <ul><li>Expedited building permit review. </li></ul><ul><li>+ $250,000 construction project. </li></ul><ul><li>Adding several services that require skilled workers. </li></ul>Martin County
  40. 45. Liberator Medical Supply <ul><li>Building permit expedited </li></ul><ul><li>Current employment is 121. </li></ul><ul><li>Quick Response Training Grant of $134,000 to help train the 200 new, permanent, full-time employees it plans to hire during the next 24 months. </li></ul>Martin County
  41. 46. Vought Paint Booth <ul><li>Expedited site plan review. </li></ul><ul><li>$12.9 million taxable investment by Vought. </li></ul><ul><li>100 direct jobs during next three years. </li></ul>Martin County
  42. 47. Turbo Combustor <ul><li>Expedited site plan review for new 19,000 square foot building and parking lot. </li></ul><ul><li>Recent job growth from 350 to 376 employees . </li></ul>Martin County
  43. 48. Awareness Technology: 1st LSTAR <ul><li>Expedited conversion of grocery store site in a PUD to accommodate expansion plans for local company producing clinical laboratory instrumentation. </li></ul><ul><li>&quot;Support such as this should bode well for Martin County's economic future,&quot; the company said in a news release. (Stuart News 5/17/11) </li></ul>Martin County
  44. 49. Questions??? Martin County Questions ?
  45. 50. St. Lucie County EDC
  46. 51. Palm Beach County Regulatory Climate Committee (&quot;RCC&quot;) Joshua I. Long, AICP Gunster Law Firm
  47. 52. Palm Beach County – Regulatory Climate Committee (&quot;RCC&quot;) <ul><li>History </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Economic Council of Palm Beach County Commissioned Market Street Study </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Market Street Findings </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>&quot;In Business, Perception Is Reality”….. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cumbersome development rules in certain areas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Damaged reputation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Modest collaboration </li></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Damage To Economy?  Losing Business To Other Areas In The State, Or Nationwide. </li></ul><ul><li>Palm Beach County was Fighting: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Cheaper land; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cheaper housing; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Property insurance costs; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Faster approvals; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Corruption scandals; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Perceived as more “business friendly” </li></ul></ul>
  48. 53. RCC Formed <ul><li>Mission </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To Identify Issues And Present Solutions As It Pertains To The Regulatory Process In Order To Improve Business Development And Economic Growth Within PBC. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Understand effects of Reg. Review on Business Development, both Private & Public </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identify Best Practices, Private & Public </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Establish Public/Private Communication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Buy in from municipalities  (38 in PBC) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Presentations to IPARC and City Managers Association </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Steering Committee </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Public / Private Partnership </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Meets Monthly - &quot;Keep the momentum alive” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Works on Key Issues and Conducts Research and Analysis </li></ul></ul>
  49. 54. RCC Programs <ul><li>One on one interviews </li></ul><ul><li>Stakeholder workshop </li></ul><ul><li>Subgroup workshops </li></ul><ul><li>Surveys (Directors and CEO's) </li></ul>
  50. 55. RCC Interviews <ul><li>Method of Interviews </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Same questions for everyone </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Anonymous </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Administered by same sector </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>and discipline </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Who Responded </li></ul><ul><ul><li>37 Private Sector </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>37 Public Sector </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mix of Disciplines and Government </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Agencies </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Interview Categories : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>  Customer Service </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Communication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Process & Predictability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Documents & Interpretation </li></ul></ul>
  51. 56. Interview Report <ul><li>42 page report </li></ul><ul><li>Identified challenges and </li></ul><ul><li>opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>Identified Public and Private </li></ul><ul><li>Sector Similarities and Differences </li></ul><ul><li>Results: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Broad </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Profession specific </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Existing Struggles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Best Practices </li></ul></ul><ul><li>All reports and materials are available at </li></ul>
  52. 57. RCC Stakeholder Workshop <ul><li>Public/Private Stakeholder Workshop </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>1/2 day workshop </li></ul><ul><li>115 Participants </li></ul><ul><li>Charrette style break out groups </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Workshop Stakeholders </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Local Government / Department Heads </li></ul><ul><li>Private Clients </li></ul><ul><li>Elected Officials </li></ul><ul><li>City and County Managers </li></ul><ul><li>Builders / Developers </li></ul><ul><li>Design Team / Architects / Planners </li></ul><ul><li>Contracted Private Consultants who conduct public sector reviews </li></ul><ul><li>Neighbors </li></ul><ul><li>Advisory Boards </li></ul><ul><li>League of Cities </li></ul><ul><li>Business Forum (Economic Council, Gold Coast Builders Association, ABC, AGC, etc.) </li></ul>
  53. 58. RCC – Subgroups Formed <ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Planners, Landscape Architects and Land Use Lawyers </li></ul><ul><li>Engineers and Architects </li></ul><ul><li>Building Department and Inspectors </li></ul><ul><li>Each Subgroup met several times to fine-tune survey and workshop findings for their profession </li></ul>
  54. 59. Planning and Zoning Subgroup <ul><li>Customer Service, Communication, Interpretation </li></ul><ul><li>Director Interpretation on Code and Process Application </li></ul><ul><li>Ongoing Training for Staff </li></ul><ul><li>Standard Methodology of Communication via Email, Memo, Letter (Internal And External) </li></ul><ul><li>Clear Job Description/Responsibility for Staff </li></ul><ul><li>Project Management/Coordination Meeting with Staff and Applicant </li></ul><ul><li>Established policy in follow up (email, phone, meetings) </li></ul><ul><li>Role of Elected Officials (training on goals of organization and communication with staff) </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunity for input from Public before application approval </li></ul><ul><li>Broadcasting of hearings and meetings </li></ul><ul><li>Calendar of hearings/meetings/submittals </li></ul><ul><li>Surveys (on customer service, code amendments) </li></ul><ul><li>Other:  (Public-Private &quot;Bill of Rights&quot; – Professionalism, Accountability, Responsiveness, Ethics, Communication) </li></ul>
  55. 60. Planning and Zoning Subgroup <ul><li>Documents and Processes </li></ul><ul><li>  Processes clearly established in Ordinance </li></ul><ul><li>Application Flow Charts </li></ul><ul><li>Flexibility by Staff in enforcing Process or Minor Changes.  (Code vs. Internal Policy Memo) </li></ul><ul><li>On Call Planner to respond to general questions </li></ul><ul><li>Pre-Application Meetings to review applications with applicant and agent </li></ul><ul><li>Standardized Comments and Conditions of Approval </li></ul><ul><li>Confirmation Letters for applicant on a use or a process </li></ul><ul><li>Submittal checklists </li></ul><ul><li>Electronic Applications (typable forms, e-attachments of applications) </li></ul><ul><li>Electronic Submittal of Application </li></ul><ul><li>Expedited Approval Processes </li></ul><ul><li>Electronic Site Plan Amendments </li></ul>
  56. 61. Planning and Zoning Subgroup <ul><li>Technology </li></ul><ul><li>  Electronic database to maintain applications </li></ul><ul><li>Electronic Discussion Board (e.g. Microsoft SharePoint or Adobe collaboration) </li></ul><ul><li>Video/Teleconferencing </li></ul><ul><li>Websites </li></ul><ul><li>Streamline Webcasting Meeting and Hearings </li></ul><ul><li>Hardware / Software Compatibility </li></ul>
  57. 62. Public/Private Regulatory Climate Survey <ul><li>Surveys based on Palm Beach County Regulatory Climate Committee </li></ul><ul><li>workshop results from May 2010 </li></ul><ul><li>Surveys sent to Directors, CEO level officials </li></ul><ul><li>Purpose -  to identify best practices, not critique shortcomings </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Public Sector </li></ul><ul><li>  38 surveys sent to Planning/Zoning Directors - December 2010 </li></ul><ul><li>14 of 38 municipalities (36.8%) completed survey </li></ul><ul><li>Top three topics from Public Sector Survey: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Accountability and Responsibility </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Technology </li></ul></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>Private Sector </li></ul><ul><li>  22 surveys sent to Principals/CEO's/Shareholders - February 2011 </li></ul><ul><li>16 of 22 (72.7%) completed survey </li></ul><ul><li>Top three topics from Private Sector Survey results: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Communication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Expedited Reviews </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Adherence to Project Schedules </li></ul></ul>
  58. 63. RCC Results & Future <ul><ul><li>Centralized Contractor Certification </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>One registration location for all departments to reference </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Confirm licenses, Insurance, Business Tax Receipts </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Maintained by PBC Contractor Certification Department </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Universal Building Permit Application </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>One form used by all building departments county-wide </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Based on state-statute, with contractor and building official input </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Draft has been approved by Building Officials Association, final approval expected this month </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Second Stakeholder Workshop planned for Spring 2012 </li></ul></ul>
  59. 64. Palm Beach County Universal Building Permit Application (DRAFT)
  60. 65. Questions or Comments? <ul><li>Should projects be rated based on their economic development value for review priority? </li></ul><ul><li>Is it a good idea to not require landscaping upgrades on redevelopment projects and allow owners 6 months to come into compliance and issue a temporary C.O.? </li></ul><ul><li>Do you always need to go through a regulatory rethink, ineffective management scenario? </li></ul><ul><li>Does fast track reviews create jobs or economic growth? </li></ul>
  61. 66. Continued discussion… <ul><li>Next session 4:00p - 5:15p </li></ul><ul><li>Reduce Process, Not Planning: Providing Business Friendly Customer Service, a how to approach </li></ul>