Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Design Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Naples council debates streamlining site‑plan and Design Review Board process; early DRB review favored by several members
Summary
Staff presented three procedural options for handling new development review. Many councilors, builders and architects supported keeping an early Design Review Board review to surface design issues and reduce late‑stage changes, while legal and staff cautioned that code changes — not just process tweaks — may be needed to avoid unwanted outcomes.
Naples staff brought three alternative flow charts for new development review and asked council whether to change the current multi‑stage process. The options were: keep the current flow (preliminary DRB → site plan → PAB/council if entitlements needed → final DRB); remove final DRB (so early DRB comments are reflected administratively before permitting); or remove preliminary DRB and rely on final DRB later in the sequence.
Council, Planning staff and local architects debated tradeoffs. Several councilors and industry representatives favored option B (retain early DRB, eliminate the second/final hearing) so design concerns are surfaced early and the record is clearer. Legal counsel noted single‑hearing records are preferable on quasi‑judicial questions but underscored the need to preserve appeal rights and to ensure entitlements (variances, conditional uses) remain triggers that bring projects before council. Staff and builders emphasized that the long time between approvals and building permits — often because multiple departments re‑review revisions — is costly to applicants and slows housing and redevelopment. Several participants urged clearer, objective code language (not subjective standards) so staff can make consistent administrative calls, and they recommended an internal code‑amendment process to address recurring problem areas without repeatedly requiring council hearings.
Council asked staff to draft the amendments necessary to implement the option of removing the final DRB hearing while keeping an early DRB review (option B) and to return with proposed language and clear rules for appeals and appeals timing. Staff said they will prepare code amendments and process language and return to PAB and council for review.
What’s next: staff will draft code changes and process language to implement an early DRB review / remove second DRB hearing model, while clarifying appeal timing and entitlements that must continue to go to PAB/council.
