Loading...
DSAC ROW Minutes 04/29/2024 - Draft April 29, 2024 1 MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE ROW HANDBOOK UPDATES SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING Naples, Florida, April 29, 2024 LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee, in and for the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 2 P.M. in REGULAR SESSION at the Collier County Growth Management Community Department Building, Conference Room #609/610, 2800 Horseshoe Drive North, Naples, Florida, with the following members present: Blair Foley, Chairman John English Chris Mitchell ALSO PRESENT: Jaime Cook, Director, Development Review Joshua Hildebrand, County Consultant, Johnson Engineering Lucia Martin, Project Manager I Any persons in need of the verbatim record of the meeting may request a copy of the audio recording from the Collier County Growth Management Community Department. April 29, 2024 2 1. Call to Order: Ms. Cook called the meeting to order at 2 p.m. 2. Approve Agenda (No changes/approved) 3. New Business a. Proposed ROW Handbook Ms. Cook: Last time in August when we met, we went got through all the chapters and were left with appendices. Mr. English has been making some progress updating the comments from the August meeting. Today we want to focus on getting through the two appendices which is straightforward. Appendix C, which is all the details, warrants discussion and input. If there is anything we didn't discuss or we need clarification on from last time, we want to have those discussions as well. Mr. Hildebrand provided a summary as follows:  For note keeping, reference the page number at the very bottom of each page.  Again, this is your meeting. If you want to take it in a different direction as we get through the last two appendices, that's perfectly fine. We can do a recap of some of the items we talked about from the chapters after we get through the appendices. Mr. Hildebrand: Page 83d are comments that we received from different entities. The first one: The following additional information shall, upon request, be supplied to the County if the proposed work involves alteration of a public drainage facility or work that involves or is adjacent to Water and Sewer District assets. Mr. Foley: Could you give me some input on the choice of word – adjacent – on ‘work that involves or is adjacent to Water and Sewer District assets.’ That is subject to interpretation; immediately adjacent would be directly connected to – I am curious why that word, adjacent, was chosen. Maybe just give me an example as to why. Mr. Martin: My guess would be from Public Utilities protecting their assets – meeting their damage prevention criteria. Mr. Hildebrand: I can go back after the meeting and see where that recommendation came from. Mr. Mitchell: It is interesting they didn't add any criteria, they just said if it's adjacent to, so it doesn’t have a lot of teeth. Action Item: Further clarification of the word adjacent. Mr. English: Page 83, Section e3 – regarding following current FDOT standards. Does DOT have a lot of relevant irrigation and landscape standards? We use them all the time for drainage and paving, for instance, but not landscape and irrigation. Mr. Hildebrand: I believe the intent of that comment was to make sure that there are no sight triangle issues, but that could be further clarified. That's a good comment. They April 29, 2024 3 don't have a lot of specific landscaping criteria except for the size of landscaping materials of driveways and median openings to make sure there are no site issues. Mr. English: If there was site visibility or maintenance of traffic issues, DOT standards should be followed but add something more specific. If I told my landscape architect, you need to use DOT standards for his landscaping irrigation he would look at me and say what are you talking about? Action Item: Further clarification on the intent of FDOT standards. Mr. Mitchell: Page 85 Item 17 Permits – the length of the permit and the general permits. Where is that defined? Mr. English: The permit will expire 180 days after the issuance of the permit, unless authorized in the specific instance for a longer or shorter period. If the work has not been done or completed by the expiration date, there will be a renewal fee that you can extend 90 days. Mr. Mitchell: I want to talk about the completion and turn lane improvements prior to accessing the site. If we have that and adhere to that, then the 180 days isn't that big a deal because they're going to want to get that done and get it out of the way. But if there is no correlation to the access for the site and the completion of the turn lanes and certification prior to getting access – which again think about it, if that is the only access and you're going to turn over a turn lane and you're putting all this heavy equipment on it, it's probably not the smartest thing that we've dictated to be done. Also, if you're not doing that, the180 days could languish because they put it at the end of it, they'll rock it, they'll do all the other improvements, but they won't certify it until the end because you've got a bunch of heavy equipment coming through there and damaging asphalt, could damage the curb, that they will repair at that point in time. Mr. English: I think that's one of the single largest issues or challenges we face. We talked about it last time. Everybody struggles with it. Do we want to make that a separate point – the lifespan of the permit. We have had cases where there's a sidewalk in the right-of-way out front of a project. That's where the water main is. We need to take out 20 feet of sidewalk to make the hot tap but then we need to leave a jumper on, and depending on the specifics of any given project, there is a period before you can tie the water line in. You need to go through a process. You need to get to a point where it's qualified to test. Then you test and have it certified. Then you schedule a tie in before you can repour 20 feet of sidewalk and we've had cases where the projects are sitting there with a backflow preventer sitting where a sidewalk needs to be repoured. Everything else is done. Does the permit still need to be valid for that? That's a long period of time. Further discussion ensued:  Extenuating circumstances – such as a hurricane or recession  Keeping track so that the permit does not expire  Is the fee structure something to look into  Commercial development versus single family – two different right-of-way permits  Different permitting if it is a STP or PPL – different timeframes  Have a different checkmark on the application with different timeframes  Continue to have this discussion and see where it can go April 29, 2024 4  It is an exception and not the rule for a commercial permit to be open for years  Make it reasonable; compromise  Residential is covered; commercial is not – find a resolution to the 180 days versus STP and PPL periods  Get an exemption for a mobilization in to start clearing, then start working on the turn lane  Pave a temporary turn lane, not certifying it complete, which won’t require relocation of utilities, drainage – it’s a throw away access to get into the site  Have the people that made the decision come to DSAC and explain the reasoning  This is worthy of an organized meeting to determine what the issues are and how to craft language and regulations that are reasonable and functional Mr. Hildebrand: Moving forward:  Page 158 – No changes/approved.  Pages 159-160 – No changes/approved.  Pages 163-164 - No changes/approved.  Page 165-171 - No changes/approved. Action Item: Page 161 – Industrial-Commercial-Multi Family: Change the 30’ to 25’ ROW Permit Section Action Item: Pages 172-173 – Swale Drain Inlet: No Reason to Keep These Pages  Pages 176, 177, 179 – No changes/approved.  Pages 180-181 – discussion ensued regarding ASPHALT DRIVE DETAIL  Pertains to residential driveway connections  Why use SP if it is not verified or inspected  Asphalt driveways need not be permitted in Collier County; only driveway access in the right-of-way  Does the applicant provide a density test on that part of the driveway  Is this being provided as general guidance  Brick paver driveways must be permitted  Different technologies – grass strips and permeable materials – do we want to capture it here and if so, how do we do that  Driveways, concrete or pavers, could stop 20’ from the property line to the connection to the street which is not uniform  It does say asphalt, concrete or pavers – include them or come up with a variance process; come up with alternatives; alternative methods as determined by the engineers – give flexibility to the homeowners  Why have details – for residential there is a hole in the process; we are trying to protect the county’s assets of the right-of-way by having driveways correctly constructed  Keep it relatively simple for people that want to build a house No Specific Action Taken April 29, 2024 5  Pages 184-185 – No changes/approved. Mr. Hildebrand: The proposed changes to the indexes at the back, it sounds like we're in general agreement that a lot of them can be removed and simply referencing the FDOT current indexes in general. We heard some feedback. We'll go back and double check that one we talked about. I'm not sure why there was a request to save it, but we'll go back and revisit that. And then there's going to be some internal discussions regarding driveway types. I think that was a good discussion. We got through what we needed to make it through the initial changes to the right-of-way manual. Points made by the Board:  We need to have a discussion with all the players involved with the turn lane. It is a very big issue.  It's important to find out what is the genesis of it. Let's find out where it came from and what are the concerns. There could be good alternatives. Ms. Cook: Point well taken and we're happy to have those discussions. Would you want to see all these changes that you have recommended from the previous meeting and today’s meeting brought back to you in a subcommittee or full committee? We will have our internal conversations and send the information to you by email about both the permit timeframe and the turn lane issues. We could send it to you at the beginning of June. That should give you give you time to review, digest, and think about things. We can then schedule the next meeting in August. We will then have time to update it before it goes to the full committee. 4. Public Comments None. 5. Adjourn Future Meeting Date: August, TBD There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by the order of the Chairman at 3:30 p.m. COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE SUBCOMMITTEE April 29, 2024 6 ___________________________ Blair Foley, Chairman These minutes were approved by the Committee/Chairman on ________________ as presented (choose one) ________, or as amended _________.