A rezoning petition often prompts neighbors to pack public hearings to oppose it, but a proposed Collier County land-development amendment heading toward a final vote would avert the public hearing requirement.

The intent is to incentivize developers to add affordable housing to commercial and mixed-use districts.

The Planning Commission on March 6 voted 5-1, with Michael Petscher opposing, to expand the allowance for commercial districts to develop a residential or mixed-use residential and commercial development by right — without public hearings — if they offer affordable housing.

“The potential for a developer to build something that doesn’t conform to the community is astronomical — and there would be nobody to petition that or object to that,” Petscher said when asked about his nay vote.

The amendment now heads to the Board of County Commissioners for a hearing. If passed, it also will increase density within activity centers — preferred locations for commercial and mixed-use developments — from 16 units per acre to 25 if affordable housing is provided and increase opportunities to add more density in developments along bus-transit lines.

No residents spoke out, but land-use attorney Rich Yovanovich sent the county an email suggesting a clarification that was incorporated.

Since the Urban Land Use Institute in 2017 concluded Collier County had an affordable housing problem and recommended six core strategies, planners have worked to remedy that. Commissioners that year accepted a community housing plan and asked staff to prepare growth-management plan and land-development code amendments to address five initiatives the plan identified:

• Provide regulatory relief to certain housing applications, which commissioners approved in 2021.
• Allow commercial-to-residential conversions through the county Hearing Examiner.
• Develop guidelines to incentivize mixed-income residential housing.
• Develop a process to designate certain strategic-opportunity sites to allow increased density, which commissioners approved in 2023.
• Provide an increase in density to Community Redevelopment Agency areas and along transit routes, called transit-oriented developments.

The 2021 amendment clarifies that clustering development for affordable housing doesn’t require conditional-use approval in Residential Multi-Family 6 districts and creates alternative affordable housing design standards. The 2023 amendment allows affordable housing by right in certain commercial zoning districts.

“One of the amendments that the board provided for direction was they wanted to provide for by-right affordable housing, to be able to eliminate the public hearing and eliminate the NIMBYism to help promote the provision of affordable housing,” Planning & Zoning Director Mike Bosi said of the not-in-my-backyard mindset of many residents opposing developments near their homes.

Bosi said this will allow mixed-use and affordable housing by right in commercial zoning districts. Up to 16 units per acre would be allowed if all units are affordable.

“That’s the gift, that’s the benefit — and that’s the justification for having the proposal be approved without a public hearing,” he added.

The amendments are geared toward nonprofit developers, such as Habitat for Humanity and McDowell Housing Partners and others that utilize tax credits and government subsidies. They develop housing for residents earning 50% to 100% of area median income, which is $104,300, while full-profit providers target 80% and 100% of AMI.

“We want to allow for high-density residential opportunities with affordable housing to be developed within those high-employment areas,” he said, noting it improves roadways because workers live close to their jobs.

If half the units are located within a quarter mile of a CAT bus stop, a developer can build 13 units an acre that don’t have to be affordable, he said. But they could build 12 more units per acre — up to 25 through the affordable housing density bonus program — if the additional units are affordable.

Planning Manager Eric Johnson said ULI’s six recommended core strategies for Collier were to increase the affordable housing supply, maintain it, regulate and govern, enhance transportation options, enhance wages and engage, market and educate.

Johnson noted the amendments would quicken the process, but added, “Folks need to be aware that the housing project’s going to be developed where they once thought was a commercial development.”

Housing Policy & Economic Development Director Cormac Giblin made changes to the affordable housing densities that were endorsed by the county Affordable Housing Advisory Committee:

• Mixed-income housing commitments must be recorded in public records by a developer using an agreement, ordinance or other land-use restriction.
• Affordable units must be mixed and not segregated from market-rate units, and the ratio of bedrooms shall be the same or more than those in market-rate units.
• The commitment extends 30 years from the initial sale or rental date, and rentals require income verification to be submitted annually.

Because not all units must be affordable, he said, “We’re attacking the supply side, as well, so whether or not they’re restricted to be affordable, we’re having an impact in the market.”

After the hearing, Gary Oldehoff, a land-use attorney who has represented residents in numerous counties, predicted a crisis if the amendment is approved.

“Not all public participation, public input and interest in decision-making in the sunshine is NIMBYism,” Oldehoff said of Florida’s Sunshine Law, which requires transparency. “The public’s trust in their local government is critical. … If the public is apprised of what their local government is doing and has an opportunity to be heard to pass on their input and interests, in the very vast majority of instances it is left with a sense that the local government is legitimate — regardless of the outcome.”

If everything is done in the sunshine and commissioners justify their decisions, public participation should not be seen as interference, but “essential,” he said, adding: “The best way … is to invite and welcome input from electors and make decisions that are required by the law.”