Loading...
Floodplain Management Committee Minutes 09/10/2012 R Floodplain Management Planning Committee Chairman-Jerry Kurtz Vice Chair- Craig Pajer Kenneth Bills Phillip Brougham Joseph Gagnier Mike Sheffield Dan Summers Christine Sutherland Clarence Tears Duke Vasey Christa Carrera (Naples) Bob Mahar(Marco I.) Raquel Pines (Everglades City) Meeting Minutes for 9-10-12 Regular Meeting Start: 9:02 a.m. End: 10:27 a.m. Location: 2800 N Horseshoe Dr, Room 610 Meeting Attendance: Duke Vasey,Jerry Kurtz, Robert Wiley,Christine Sutherland,Clarence Tears, Kenneth Bills,Joseph Gagnier, Christa Carrera,Corinne Trtan (alternate for Craig Pajer), Rick Zyvoloski (alternate for Dan Summers) Absent: Raquel Pines(Excused),Phil Brougham (Excused), Mike Sheffield (Excused)and Bob Mahar There were two (2) additional staff members in attendance. Meeting called to order by Jerry Kurtz, Chairman. OLD BUSINESS: 1. Approval of minutes for the 7-2-12 Regular Meeting-Jerry Kurtz asked if there were any needed changes to the minutes. Jerry reviewed them,noted a couple changes that were made per the last meeting. Duke Vasey had one comment regarding June's meeting minutes (brought up in July's meeting approval of minutes). Page 4, 5th paragraph, 5th line- It said that Longshore Lakes had created a video for their homeowners on the importance of water quality.Duke said it should be Island Walk. With that change,a motion was made to approve the minutes. Passed unanimously. 2. Committee membership discussion- Robert Wiley Robert explained that it is a 15 member committee-4 staff positions and 8 public members(6 of which are filled). There are also 3 positions for City of Naples, Everglades City and Marco Island. Brooke Hollander tendered her resignation during this past week,as she couldn't dedicate the time to being at the meetings. There are two public positions being advertised right now The four staff positions are filled.A quorum is 50%+ 1.As of today's meeting,there are 13 total members,so we need 8 to have a quorum(which is met). Robert introduced one new member of the committee,who has filled the spot vacated by Lew Schmidt. Mr. Kenneth Bills was appointed by the county manager last week. Ken introduced himself. He is originally from Michigan. He worked for Ford Motor Company for 34 years as an engineer. His background is electrical engineering but spent most of his career in mechanical engineering. He traveled down to Naples quite often to work at the Ford test facility located nearby. When he retired,he and his wife became snowbirds for three years until recently 1 deciding to become full time residents. Ken heard Robert speak at Foxfire regarding FEMA and flood maps and found it interesting and decided to get involved.Welcome to Ken. NEW BUSINESS: 1. 2010 Florida Building Code Compliant Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance-Robert Wiley We have been talking about the Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance during our meetings for the last 2-3 years. It has been a long process with FEMA. They rejected our ordinance when we submitted it to them during the first part of the year. We worked with them to get their comments and find out what they found objectionable. We reworked it and submitted to our board in June and it was adopted.We got notice from FEMA that our ordinance is in compliance. However, due to the adoption of the new 2010 Florida Building Code in March of this year,there is a lot of new language involving floodplain criteria in it. Some of this is a bit contradictory to the language in the standard flood ordinances used here and around the state. So-the state has come up with a new model ordinance and we need to go through the process again.The direction we got from the state was"replace and repeal". Robert is not sure if this is the direction the county will take-we need to see what the county attorney's office says. Robert feels that the states new ordinance is"drastically"different in layout and"significantly" different in content, especially in the way it addresses certain issues. Robert sent the information to the county attorney's office months ago. When he checked with them recently,he found that they have not yet looked at it. They would like him to resubmit the information and explain to them exactly what we need. Robert had told FEMA that we would be working on this new ordinance in the fall. Autumn starts in two weeks and he is concerned about beginning. We need to get the advice of the attorney's whether or not to revise the current ordinance or take the states advice and"replace and repeal". The state is pushing for the latter. We do need to submit to the state before submitting to FEMA. Jerry confirmed that our current ordinance is in compliance. Jerry also questioned how quickly we need to get on the task of drafting the new ordinance. Robert informed us that our current ordinance does contain one provision that says if there is a conflict between our ordinance and the 2010 Florida Building Code on any issue,the FL Building Code will supersede. However,that being said,the state said they understand our intent,but that it is not sufficient. We must start working on bringing in the new ordinance this fall. Duke Vasey asked if anyone knew when the CRS Coordinator draft will be released. Robert replied that the draft has been released-it is available on the website right now. Christa provided the website address:www.crs2012.org. It is supposedly the final draft and the book will be finalized through the OMB by FEMA. Again-we are waiting for communication from the county attorney's office before we can decide which way to go in the matter of drafting a new ordinance. Duke had one last question-he wanted to know about the higher regulatory standards-and how it will play against the 2010 FL Building Code. Robert said the state has been working on blocks you can insert into the typical types of higher regulatory issues out there that communities have If you have an issue and want to include one of them,they are directing communities to get in contact with them and they will work with them on how to take the states block language and where to insert in the ordinance. If there is something out of the ordinary,they want to work 2 with them directly in drafting the right language. Duke wanted to know if this included needing some kind of variance from the 2010 Code? Robert replied that these are two different issues- we are talking about the flood damage prevention ordinance not something that would be exempt from building code. That would need to be addressed through a totally different mechanism. If you want to amend something in the building code,you submit your amendment to the association that oversees it and it has a different path. Jerry asked if there were any more questions-none-so let's move on to the second item. 2. Revisions and Review to Update the Floodplain Management Plan a) Discussion on capital improvement information inclusion-Jerry Kurtz Jerry Kurtz provided a handout to address the new stormwater capital improvement program. This will be inserted into the Floodplain Management Plan to show all our efforts that are ongoing and our planned efforts for the future,a lot of which address floodplain management,flooding management and surface water improvement projects. Some of these newer projects were presented in the early part of the year(March)and this is a follow up to that. This is when we started putting together the 2013 budget. Look at the spreadsheet on page 2,it lists the projects.They are grouped into various types. If you look at column FY 13,this is for the fiscal year beginning October 1st. It's pretty much set right now-there is one more budget hearing but it has been submitted. Stormwater management is one of the programs that must be annually reported on to keep up with growth and to be in sync with growth. It's the capital improvement plan but it's also the insert for the Annual Update Inventory Report(AUIR). Each year,the millage rate for stormwater generates about$4.6 million.In FY 13,a good majority of that money is going toward the Lely Area Stormwater Improvement Project(LASIP). FY 14 and FY 15 are still holding that funding level. It has been a big project and it's more than halfway done-it's going very well. It was divided up into 27 components and since 2006,we've been completing segments. It's all in East Naples where in the 90's and 2000's,the worst flooding of this area occurred. We're planning on having it finished during FY 15. Back to FY 13 - there is a little money left and we fund some other things. Every year we fund the NPDES MS4 program. This is a program where the county has to maintain a permit to meet the requirements of a federal program-National Pollutant Discharge Elimination program. The stormwater system is called the MS4 system-Municipal Separate Storm Sewage System. We have to report on how well we maintain that system every year. All the efforts have to be documented and reported on how we properly operate and maintain the system. We fund that with a projected$150,000 per year for the next five years. In FY 14-17,it is an estimate-they are all subject to change,as we go through the year. Part of the requirements for operating the system is knowing what the system is. We have been spending a lot of money in the past few years going out and finding the system and entering it into a GIS database. We have really got the system identified-all the critical points. We went for the big trunk lines first, and then branched out to smaller stuff. The ultimate goal is to have every part of our system in this database. Even down to the point where all the private inputs into the system are coming in. This is because the county is responsible for 3 the runoff water that comes in this system,what's in it,pollutant loadings,etc. So proper mapping is critical—it involves a lot of survey work but it has been a huge success for us. If you go on www.colllergov.net,you can see a reduced,user-friendly version of this map. If you just do a search for"stormwater management maps",it'll take you to a web page and the very first link is highlighted in yellow and a nice map comes up. You can click on the map itself and drag it up or down. It's easy to play with and is very informative. Once we finish that one big LASIP project,it will free up more money and we will have a good 10 or 15 projects going on and can diversify more around the county and a lot of this is focusing on infrastructure replacement. We have identified weirs in need of repair and replacement. Some might be 3 to 4 year efforts. Jerry has provided a detail sheet for the 7 new bigger projects,and a synopsis on the last two pages of the remainder of projects. Robert thinks that all the sheets should be included in the AUIR as a backup of information. He wondered how committed are these projects once they get placed in here. Jerry responded that FY 13 will be funded and all the rest will be subject to subsequent year funding. However,the program is pretty solid with a dedicated millage rate. We did have a reduction in funding(like everyone else),but we were conservative in estimate of increasing funds. We kept it flat for FY 13 and FY 14,and used about a 2%increase per year after. Hopefully it will be more robust as the economy picks up. Jerry asked if there were any questions and said he would like to get the committee to endorse this as the stormwater plan as it will be inserted into the AUIR. Rick from Emergency Management had a question. Does anyone maintain the bubble maps that show areas prone to flooding or where the flooding is? Jerry replied that we have a map produced a long time ago called"Areas of Poor Drainage". Rick wonders if it was maintained. He assumes that over time,stormwater projects have improved some of these areas. He suggests that it might be a neat idea to add bubble maps, showing where projects are and when they were worked on,to show the improvement-to show that"our"money has been well spent. It would also be helpful to see where the current areas of potential flooding are. He would like to know if our transportation/road maintenance people go out after storms and mark areas where there are flooding concerns. It would be great to tie together with road maintenance for this project. Clarence also had a question/concern regarding the Golden Gate City project. He feels like this is more of a road maintenance project or road construction? Shouldn't transportation be funding this? Jerry replied that they do the road overlay,but that this program is related to all the old metal storm pipes. Clarence thought they were connected to the road structures.Jerry said they are connected to roadside swales but that the most of these leave the right of way and go into the canals.They run through people's yards,between houses,into the canals. We are trying to prioritize replacing all the pipes and think it makes sense to start in the right of way so transportation can lay the new pavement.We could then follow the pipes to the canal system. It's a stormwater management project to get the water out of the roads and to the canals. Transportation will fund the road portion of this. Clarence thinks they should fund a little more. There is a lot of sheet flow from the roads. He thinks if Transportation shouldered more of the cost,it would free up more money for our projects. Another 4 comment he has is that in some of the future projects,the engineering and design costs seem to be running at about 20%and they should only be about 10%.We may want to look at those,as design is usually only about 10%of a project cost. Duke wanted clarification of the difference between stormwater and surface water. Jerry replied that the MS4 system is maintained and operated by the road maintenance department. The road maintenance department is part of the GMD,as well as construction and project management. They do the design, engineering and permitting of new projects. Planning is done by the new natural resources department. The NPDES is run by the natural resources department. The stormwater management is run by the cooperation of the three departments,but all are in the GMD. It runs across three departments. Duke wanted to know where he would find the inspections group among these three. Jerry replied that the operations and maintenance would be the road maintenance department. They are the ones that are out looking around and finding stuff that is plugged. They also receive calls for surface water issues. They are the eyes and the ears and the inspections are in the road maintenance department. Duke pointed out that Collier County has a flow thru system. It's constructed and maintained here.How do we know we are getting the inspections done through the system. How do we set that up? Jerry said it's like a cascade really-it starts in the neighborhoods,and then moves through our system,then through the big system. Each responsible entity for those pieces has to do their own due diligence as far as inspection and maintenance. It's how the program is set up and always has been. The HOA is really responsible for whatever stormwater management systems they have in their neighborhood. They often call in but we have to direct them back to their bylaws. We push aggressive education and awareness programs to address this issue. The awareness of the system as a whole has grown tremendously during this past year. That is the direction we're going right now-education-not pushing any kind of mandated inspection program. Duke wonders why bother with the specifics in water permit that is issued,if there is no enforcement? Jerry replied that a permit lays out what it is,the conditions,and how it can be maintained and who is responsible for maintaining the system. We often pull them out and help HOA's learn what their responsibilities are. Sometimes we do this over and over, as HOA boards change and things get lost or don't get transferred over. We think it's better to spend time with education than with threatening letters. Clarence commented that in his past experience with FEMA,he knew they had to keep their systems in tip top shape. He's concerned because in Golden Gate City and other areas we have identified,we identify the systems as very poor quality crumbling and compromised. He's worried that we may not get FEMA funding after a major storm event because of the condition of the systems. He thinks we may need to talk to the commissioners to beef up the program in order to make sure we would qualify for FEMA funds. Rick agrees that it is a problem but there may be a way to address this. We need to work on a maintenance plan for the failing system and establish a time frame for replacement. FEMA would come and inspect.They may say"No.Ten years won't work",so we agree to five years or seven years. Usually by that, FEMA will agree,because you're attempting in good faith to "fix"the system. If a major disaster would happen,you have the documentation to show that something was being done.Jerry really appreciates all the great comments and suggestions. He asked 5 Robert if it might be possible to include in the engineering assessment of all the water control structures we're having done,an inspection of the stormwater system? Robert thinks this report is more for the canals and weirs,not the stormwater system. He thinks it wouldn't address what Clarence and Rick are talking about-and that is establishing a maintenance program. He thinks we need to come up with a way to submit with the AUIR a way to address the identified deficiencies. Ken had a question-looking at the first project on the detail sheet#51029-it shows a dollar amount of$250,000 for FY 13,but he does not see where it comes out on the detail sheet. The detail sheet shows$650,000 for FY 2013.Why this discrepancy? Jerry explains that there's some money available from FY 12 that's going to carry forward,that he does not show on the sheet. Duke suggests putting a carry forward column on there. Duke made a motion to approve the stormwater projects and the AUIR inventory report provided. Christine seconded the motion. Duke would like a carry forward column put in or a remark on the bottom of the sheet. Another point Duke would like to make before voting-he'd like to have a county position on objective 1.13,which does call for an inspection of the system. Since the county doesn't seem inclined to call for an annual inspection,maybe there could be an annual reminder mailed out that they are responsible for the conditions listed in the water permit itself. Rick would like to add a little bit of closure to the inspection part of disaster preparedness. He said that whenever you do an inspection, end it with whether it's"functional" or"not functional" at the time of the inspection. Make sure you note that the conveyance is still working at the time of inspection, even if it doesn't look pretty.Then you are covered in case of a disaster. Clarence suggests tying it into the GIS mapping.Have an overlay inspection program in place,even if it's on an every 2-3 years basis.Jerry says we are working toward that type of system with work orders,etc. It's part of the NPDES reporting. Duke is back to thinking that the inspections need to be done formally.Jerry said they would be done by Travis Gossard's group. Jerry called the vote-it was approved in favor unanimously. Duke asked Robert for the LOMA status-quantity done? Robert said we got 10,072 in one fell swoop by FEMA. After that mass LOMA,they have been coming in pretty steadily every week. Robert guesses we have had maybe 200-300 properties approved. There is no way to check online at this point. FEMA has told us that they would be sending us an automatic update document at the beginning of the month showing approved LOMA's. Three first of the months have passed and we have not seen one yet. We are trying to manually enter information we get in a file so we have it easily accessible. Right now we have to look up paperwork to find out if it's approved. Duke wondered if this is something that could be put on the Property Appraisers site.Robert replied that it could-we just need to create the file that we could share and that is what we are trying to do.They are willing to put it on their website as soon as it's available. Duke wonder if we're all using the same GIS in the county? Christa replied that they are different. The City of Naples uses a different GIS-more things show up on their maps,such as automatic flood zone and map and panel number,as well as whether there's a LOMA or LOMR on that property. But the City of Naples is very small compared to the county-they only had 25-30 LOMA's in the past couple months compared to the county's 10,000+. Robert said that within the county,we are all using ARC GIS. 6 However,we may be using different map comparisons.Internally we use the 2005 aerial used for DFIRM purposes and anything built since then we have to use updated aerials. Jerry Kurtz asked that we move on to item 2b. b) Revisions to FMP text document previously prepared by Mike DeRuntz Robert said that this is the big document we approved in late 2007,early 2008. The document was sent up to ISO for their review and it came back deficient in some areas. Since then we have stayed within the CRS program,relying upon our local mitigation strategy,which we still have. We have some serious deficiencies. Robert is trying to find time to review this and has found that we are using the wrong map. It was evaluated off the 2005 Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and our flood zones have changed,so all of the analysis is wrong and have to be redone again. We no longer have Mac Hatcher,who did all the research for it,as he has retired. Robert does not know where all his files are right now. Robert is really not that optimistic right now-we're supposed to have this to our BCC by the December meeting but he's not sure it can be done. Robert is not very fluent in GIS and will be looking for help in finding Mac's files and in rerunning the analysis and background information. Rick said that FEMA may not need all the detail. But we have a GIS person within the county-can't they help? Robert said they may be able to help-he just discovered this during this past week and has not been able to act yet.Christa wanted to know if Robert has done the recertification progress report yet to submit. He said he is working on the ISO recertification plan right now and will be putting that information in there that the Floodplain Management Plan needs to be updated and that we are working on it. Christa would like a copy of the FMP Progress Report when available. Robert said he emailed her a copy back in June. Jerry called for any more questions?Christine had a question about inspections and maintenance. When you come to an HOA in a gated community-does the county responsibility stop at the entrance gate? Jerry said yes it does. Robert said if we maintain anything within a community,it would be a non-gated community. If they have a gate, it definitely stops at the gate. When we do maintain streets within a development,we would be doing maintenance only for the immediate roadside drainage facilities-we do not maintain their lake or other things. 3. Public Comment--Jerry asked for public comments. As we had no public,there were no comments. Rick had a final question about storm surge analysis. He wondered if it could be included in the analysis. Robert replied that in the past we have not,but he will proceed along the lines of getting it included. Joe Gagnier motioned to adjourn the meeting. Motion passed unanimously at 10:27 a.m. Next Meeting: Monday,October 1st, 2012 starting at 9:00 a.m.in Room 610 of the GMD-P&R building located at 2800 North Horseshoe Drive,Naples, FL 34104. Robert would like to have the 7 flexibility to call intermediate meetings if he can get some help with the analysis. He will try to keep them on Monday's as they are now. / /27 Jerry Kurtz, Chairman 0 #0 Robert Wiley, St,/ Coordinator NOTE: A recording of the meeting is available for anyone desiring to hear it. Please contact Mr.Evy Ybaceta at the Growth Management Division—Planning and Regulation building (239-252-2400) for access to the recording. 8