Discussion of Concurrency at Agenda Review Yields a Breakthrough

 

Click this video, above, to hear the Board's discussion this morning on Concurrency

At this morning's agenda review of the Board of County Commissioners, I requested a discussion about our land development code.

Specifically--I wanted a discussion of Concurrency, Transportation Mobility Fees, and/or Impact Fees.

We are the only large county in Florida without BOTH a half cent LOST tax AND some form of Impact fee to mitigate the impact of growth on existing infrastructure and public facilities.

Over the last ten years, we have seen growth that has been unbridled and it has created issues with traffic, stormwater, and school capacity at some schools.

Concurrency, had it been in place, could have helped ameliorate some of the issues with this growth.

Concurrency was always a state requirment for countys and school boards until 2011 when it was removed as a state requirement by then Governor Rick Scott to assist the state's recovery from the Great Recession.  When it was removed as a state requirement, the Escambia BCC inserted concurrency into the County Land Development code in 2011.  Two years later, in 2013, the BCC removed it from the LDC, in order to stimulate our area's economy that was still suffering impacts from the recession.

That's how we got where we now are, in 2024.

I brought concurrency to the board and traffic mobility fees three times since my last election, once in 2021 and twice in 2022.  I did not have three votes to support these measures at that time.

I brought it again today and have now gained solid support from my counterparts to have staff do some research on the issue and bring back recommendations for implementation.  

I was heartened to get the support--because we need to bring this back and more importantly--the people want it and the county needs it.  I'm glad we are making some forward progress on this.  More to come in the months ahead.

Apartment Construction Catches Neighborhood by Surprise

Residents are concerned about a large apartment complex being constructed in Perdido--questioning whether existing traffic infrastructure can "handle" this influx of traffic

 In October of last year, a large parcel of property at the foot of the Theo Baars  bridge (which at that time was in District 2) was selected for the development of an upscale apartment community by its owner(s).

Paperwork was submitted with development services, and the process to approve the development was commenced.

This parcel, indicated above, was already zoned commercial so no rezoning notifications were necessary, nor was any action by the planning board.

The applicant submitted the appropriate plans, paperwork, and fees in order to receive an approved development order which was granted by the county in early January of 2022 (just a few months after this portion of Escambia County reverted to District 1)

So the neighbors did not see this coming for these reasons, and they--like me--share obvious concerns about traffic in this area that is growing.  Several have called me and/or emailed me with concerns.

So it is really two issues.  First issue is should a large construction project like this --even if a zoning change is not necessary-- be required to notify neighbors?  A case could be made that this could be a way to keep neighbors from being blindsided.  I'm in favor of initiating a standalone apartment ordinance to be added to the LDC as these developments are always, it seems, problematic for an assortment of reasons.

Second issue is traffic.  Can the roads handle the influx?

Part of the development review process looks at the capacity of existing roadways and a formulaic process (based upon existing traffic counts and capacities) determines if the existing roads can handle the estimated new load.  In this instance, it was determined by staff the existing roads could handle this development's impact(s) on the surrounding area.

NOW HERE'S THE GOOD NEWS:

There are a significant number of traffic improvements currently underway and/or slated for this area, to include:

--Roundabout at Johnson's Beach Road at Perdido Key Drive

--Intersection Improvements at Innerarity Point Road/Gulf Beach Hwy

--Multiple safety improvements on Sorrento--to include a light coming at Doug Ford Drive and Sorrento Road

--$2 Million in D1 LOST funding was just approved by the board last regular meeting for the PD&E for 4-lanes on Sorrento Road--which will potentially slice 5 years off of the horizon for completion of this vital project.

Read all about the $12 Million in D1 Infrastructure approved at our last meeting, here. (Big deal)

And if the small county roads that are adjacent to this new development need improvement for functionality--I'll get funding for widening/safety enhancements.

We constantly deal with the competing pressures of not allowing growth juxtaposed with the development community which want to build to address the  supply shortage of housing which leaves some residents with no viable, affordable housing options.  This is a constant struggle, and I know we have to do the best we can on infrastructure, which we will continue to do to the best of our ability.

But meanwhile, according to many experts including the latest PNJ Civicon expert, we in this area have not built enough to keep up with demand over the last decade----and this is the reason for high home prices and our rental rates which are in the stratosphere price-wise.

75th Coffee with the Commissioner this Wednesday Morning on Facebook Live---All About Growth Management and Zoning

Join us this Wednesday, August 10th, for our 75th Coffee with the Commissioner live on Facebook.  We will have Administrator Wes Moreno and Public Safety Director Eric Gilmore giving updates on the county and public safety, respectively, and as our special guests we will be joined by Development Services Director Horace Jones and Andrew "Drew" Holmer, Division Manager, Development Services. We will talk with Drew and Horace about upcoming developments, how the county's development process works, and how this county department works in conjunction with the planning board and the board of county commissioners to implement the land development code.  This is one area of governance that receives a lot of scrutiny and many citizen complaints, so I look forward to the discussion and having a lot of answers to citizen questions and complaints.  

We will start at 6:30 live on Facebook at www.facebook.com/CommissionerBergosh/ as is always the case--residents are encouraged to participate and send questions to via the comment feature during the livestream or by sending questions in advance to district1@myescambia.com or by calling the D1 office at 850-595-4910.

Development Fees---or Sales Tax Surcharge? Or Both?

 I will be discussing bringing back concurrency to the BCC's Land Development Code at our next committee of the whole meeting.  There have now been several articles in the news about this, including this one from the PNJ today which discusses the new state law limiting impact fee year over year percentage increases, as well as Santa Rosa's challenges to implementing Impact Fees there.  The last couple of paragraphs capture some of my thoughts on these fees and how I envision them working here in Escambia County.

I do not support impact fees--I support concurrency as an alternative to them.  

Concurrency is smarter, more targeted, and I believe an overall better solution.

Now, developers and homebuilders do not like any form of impact fees, nor do they like concurrency.

One of the arguments against ANY additional concurrency or impact fees being levied on Escambia County builders that I have heard a lot is that "Escambia county already has the one-cent sales surtax" that can be used for infrastructure.  So why make the builders pay more?  Is the rhetorical follow-on question.

So, I looked statewide at how other counties handle this---especially the counties that also collect the discretionary sales tax like we do.   And a couple of interesting facts stand out.  

#1---99% of Florida Counties already collect some form of discretionary sales tax like our 1 penny LOST....99%!! or 66 of 67 counties. (Citrus County is the lone county in Florida that does not collect local option sales taxes on purchases----yet ironically they DO collect impact fees on developments...)

#2---of the counties that already collect a local option sales tax----a full 57% ALSO collect Impact fees to help pay for the costs of growth and infrastructure the growth demands.

So the argument that we already have LOST and therefore we don't need any other funds to offset infrastructure challenges of growth simply does not hold water.  That argument is not persuasive.  See the breakdown, below.

Concurrency?

 

As I stated in a recent meeting, and as I prominently featured in my NEXT4Escambia plan as I ran for re-election last year, I will be bringing the topic of concurrency forward at an upcoming meeting for discussion among my peers on the Board of County Commissioners.

As a local school board member here for 10 years , I supported the concept of concurrency and voted for it on several occasions until it was watered down to a point that it was ineffective and meaningless--at which point I voted against it on principle.

I have no idea, whatsoever, where my counterparts on the BCC stand on this isssue--so at the first meeting where this is brought the topic will be brief, factual, historical and then I'll attempt to ascertain from my peers what their appetite is for moving forward with having staff bring recommendations.

This initial discussion will likely occur at the first meeting in May.

Jim Little from the PNJ called me about this topic about a week ago, and we had a really good conversation.  His article derived from that discussion is online today and will more than likely make it to the printed paper in the next few days.  It is a good article and captures the essence of our discussion.

I agree with those in the homebuilding community who believe that we can do more with the LOST funds we already have (for which they lobbied and assisted in campaigning for when the referendum(s) were put before the voters)--and it is for that reason and others that I generally oppose impact fees across the board for the county in favor of intelligent, well thought-through concurrency. (Although I will support impact fees and an enhanced MSBU/and or a TIFF on our soon to be developed OLF-8 property---as it now appears it will be largely retail and residential which will reduce our opportunity for and the size of a Triumph Gulf Coast jobs grant).

So we shall see where the concurrency discussion goes in May.  It may be something that sparks interest or it may just fizzle......