Loading...
BOAA Minutes 08/15/2024BUILDING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS AUG. 15, 2024 MEETING GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIVISION 2800 HORSESHOE DR. CONFERENCE ROOM 609/610 BOARD MEMBERS Jonathan Walsh - Chair John Melton - Vice Chair Michael Mick William Swanson Eloy Ricardo ALSO PRESENT Fred Clum, Chief Building Official Richard Long, Building Plan & Review Director Troy Komarowski, Chief Building Inspector Doug Sposito, Deputy Building Official Ronald Tomasko - Assistant County Attorney Anisley San Roma, Operations Support Marlene Serrano, Staff Liaison MEETING CALLED TO ORDER 9:00 A.M. by Jonathan Walsh, Chair. AGENDA Jonathan Walsh made the motion to adopt the Agenda for Aug. 15, 2024 Mike Mick seconded the motion Motion passed unanimously NEW BUSINESS We are here to discuss underground tank installation. We have Mr. Tripp here. Mr. Tripp • Called on Board to overturn the decision by Fred Clum to not allow propane tanks on residential property without 10 ft. of protection. • Propane tanks contain vapor. • Building Code does not include vehicles, lawn mowers, etc. Mr. Sposito • Chapter 24 of the Florida Residential Code says storage system for liquid fire, petroleum gas, shall be designed and installed in accordance with the fire prevention code NFPA58. • Go to 6.4.4. It says that it must be 10 ft. from a source of ignition. It specifically states that an internal combustion engine is a source of ignition. It is the standard and to be considered as part of any interpretation. • Most importantly is the Propane Education and Research Council PERC which is a State level. PERC is an extension of the Florida Department of Agriculture, and their job is to provide recommendations to municipalities, to counties concerning safety in regards to propane. • Our interpretation when we looked and we read everything, was simply a copy and paste of the recommendations of the Department of Agriculture in the State of Florida on placement of propane tanks and dry place. • It says underground tanks should be placed well away and at least 10ft from any road, street, driveway or parking lot. And then it says, if an underground tank must be installed within 10ft, then you need to provide physical protection such as bollards, fences, barriers, et cetera. After all of our consideration, discussions with the fire departments, looking at OSHA, looking at the NFPA standards, we decided to adopt the State's recommendation on placement of propane tanks and driveways almost verbatim as the interpretation of what would be a safe placement of such tank. • So this is NFPA58 3.3.75 sources of ignition. The operation of spark ignition internal combustion engine may create an ignition source when started and their exhaust systems can easily exceed 700 degrees. Also, these engines tend to speed up when LP gas is drawn into their intake manifold. The operation of diesel engines has been identified as a source of ignition in several fire reports. • The building official has the authority to make interpretations while it is under the fire code. A reference is a standard that is referenced in the Florida residential code specifically on the placement of underground tanks. The building official used that reference when considering his interpretation. Mr. Walsh • What was that code reference? Mr. Sposito • Residential code 24. It's in your documents. 24.12.2. Page 20 in the packet. • The interpretation is not prohibiting the placement of a tank in the driveway. It simply must meet the protection requirements as outlined as provided by PERC and as outlined in the interpretation. It must provide some sort of traffic protection. While a traffic lid rated for vehicle air traffic does not necessarily always work, as I showed in the documents near the end, for venting, proper venting and maintaining the vents above an expected water level. • That's why there are domes, because the dome can be placed on top of the lid above ground, and the venting can be properly placed above any potential flooding. NFPA specifically requires that provisions be put in place for the proper drainage of that area. • And then just one other issue is grandfathering. When a building official makes an interpretation, we never apply things retroactively. And he certainly has the authority to grandfather in his interpretations and say, this interpretation shall take place from this date forward. As we all know, I was a contractor for many decades, and you've all been contractors. • I believe I addressed all of the issues. I didn't go over all the information in the packet. I simply highlighted the two main points. Mr. Tripp • I appreciate you saying that the code does allow tanks because the code says that we can put in a tank as long as we protect it. If according to NFPA58, which it does list in there and we have provided engineering, we still have rejected permissible with it. Nowhere in the rejection letters has anybody commented about water being in the domes or anything about the benzene of the regulator. Our rejection letters are strictly Fred Krum’s interpretation of the fire code that says you cannot put a tank within 10 ft. Am I wrong? Mr. Komarowski • Typically it’s in 8.6.1 underground tanks. But there are other code references that relate to an underground tank. Mr. Tripp • I'm going to 6.4.4. That's the point of discharge for the relief valve. It doesn't say it has to be 10ft. I would like somebody to explain to me how a concrete driveway is a source of ignition. Rich, could you explain to me how concrete is a source of ignition? • That's the permanently fixed structure on the property. I want to remind everybody we're here for building code. We're not here for motor vehicle code. Motor vehicle has their own code. • I asked Rich Long and Troy to please provide me where cars are listed in Florida building codes. A parked car is not a source of ignition. A car is not a permanently affixed part of a property. A driveway can change. • Well, if there's nowhere else on a property, we'll allow it on a case to case basis. That was in a private meeting I had with Rich, Troy and Doug. We'll allow it on a case to case basis was their words. That is illegal. • Let’s bring it to the Board. Let's put it to a vote in the County. Let's try to make it an ordinance. Mr. Walsh • I don't believe they're adopting a new code. It's a new interpretation. Mr. Tripp • If you guys make a decision that a tank can't be within 10ft of the source ignition, we either have to tell every single person that they have to put ten foot bollards all the way around their tank, all the way around the dome, even in their yard, because again, a lawnmower, even electric lawn mower is considered a source of ignition because it has brushes and those brushes create arc. • A building official still has no right to interpret fire code. If it was an actual building code in the Florida field gas code, he absolutely has the right to interpret that. • Building code is in black and white. It's in a book. Show me the recommendation in that book. Not on an OSHA website for training purposes. And not by a PERC who is giving a recommendation for future codes. Pass a code. That’s all I'm asking you to do. If you guys truly feel this is unsafe, just do it the correct way. • Is assumption a code? Because you use this word assumption. You use this word recommendation in almost every sentence that you've said. You “assume” that this is possible. You have “recommendations” to do these things but in none of these have you provided the actual code that says it's not legal. Is an assumption a code? Mr. Sposito • Yes. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Walsh We have two guests. All public speakers are given 3 minutes. NORM AHERN, District Manager, South Florida Gas and Thompson Gas • An important thing that affects me and my business, and I brought this up to my corporate office and we're waiting to see what happens, is the idea of grandfathering this in. So there's a precedent already set in this county for the last 20-30 years or more. As far as these installations are approved, we have them permitted, they're signed off, everything's good. And there's been no change in the code, and it's been stated there's no change in the code that would alter this interpretation. So if there is no change and we're going to change the interpretation, my understanding is you can't arbitrarily do that and say that everybody else is okay. TOM MASTERBERTO, Fire Code Administrator, Collier County Building Department • I currently review and interpret the fire codes for the greater Naples Fire District. A little history real fast is I am a State certified fire officer and a State and Nationally certified fire code administrator, or basically a fire marshal. • In reviewing this, we talked about gas stations that's NFPA30, which is the National Fire Protection Agency code for liquefied or for flammable and combustible liquids, which has no bearing on this case. We talked about NFPA58, which is the liquid combustible liquid code. The protection basically says that the container within ten foot of any driveways has to be protected for vehicle damage. The code also says that there's three or four different ways you can do it. There are four or five different ways that you can protect the tank from vehicle damage. • In my forty years of firefighting, fire officering and now fire code administrative, I've been to many LP tank fires that were started by vehicles in driveways. They said the tanks don't explode. We have a thing in the fire service called the BLEVE, boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion. These tanks do go “boom” and when they do, they create a lot of damage. • So just a clarification on the codes again. Ahern and myself both agreed that the vehicle within ten foot of the tank is a source of ignition and we don’t approve of it. Mr. Ricardo • Mr. Masterberto, would you receive a residential permit. Mr. Masterberto • No, the only plans I would see would be commercial and multi family. TERRY FISHER, Thompson, South Florida Gas • I’ve been in the industry 38 years. I'm a master qualifier for our Company. The only time you get a BLEVE is when you have an impingement on the fire on the tank itself, the body of the tank itself. So it's the fire impingement of the tank. We're talking about tank that is buried in the ground underground. These tanks are even deeper than a normal tank.They have a protective steel dome on them. And so even if you have the Tesla sitting on top of the tank on fire melting down at 3800 degrees, it's under 18 inches protected by a steel traffic barrier. So the infringement of the tank is not an issue. What you guys are totally misunderstanding and taking totally out of context is two different concepts. • You’ve got liquid transfer of the material, and the liquid transfer as in a dispenser. The code is interpreting the point of transfer, we have to be 10ft from any source of ignition. That's the point of transfer. When you have a liquid transfer from the truck to the tank. There's a ten feet. • When the tank is just sitting there as a vessel, it doesn't have to be 10ft from a source of ignition. If the relief valve, where the regulator is on the system, we have to be 10 feet from a source of ignition that allows that. If there is a release from that regulator or whatever, then we can receive that ten foot barrier. • All this coding is designed around the point of transfer where you have a truck hooked to a tank and they're actually transferring liquid. • We're talking about vapor systems, once it's in the ground and set up to service at home. • The thing we need to do is when we install a tank, is have the location identified. Mr. Walsh I'm going to give this opportunity for either David Tripp or the County to supply any additional information that has not been presented to date. Mr. Tripp • I would like to enter into the packet a public record request from one of the fire departments. I'm only going to do the one that's been brought up. Since he said that there's been propane fires, we've either been lied to in the public record, which is a crime, or Greater Naples Fire Department has issued a ten year records request that there has never been a fire from a propane tank in a driveway or next to the driveway. If you guys would like to review this, it is from the Public Records Department of your Naples Fire Department. Mr. Walsh Any rebut. Does anybody want to make a motion that we accept the additional information as part of our record? Mr. Melton I’ll make a motion to accept this packet as well as additional information. Mr. Walsh Let me finish the motion. We have all the paperwork from the County now submitted. Mr. Swanson seconded the motion Motion passed unanimously to accept the packets. Mr. Mick • Mr. Tripp, you used the term roque building official which is very subjective. I’d like the Deputy Building Official to repeat that they have the authority to interpret. Mr. Sposito • That would be Section 553.775 of the Florida Statute. Mr. Mick • You also said, Mr. Tripp, you pointed to the Building Officials but used the term Board. You questioned the authority of the Board. I’d like our attorney to quote the Statute that gives us the authority. Mr. Tomasko • Given your Board the initial discretion to review these appeals. So under the board's auspices, you are acting in their stead right now. We are acting on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners. Mr. Tripp • I may have misinterpreted. I didn’t mean the Board is doing wrong. I’m saying the Board is supposed to adopt ordinances. Mr. Walsh • It’s not this Board that would adopt an ordinance. Mr. Tripp • No. If they feel is going to make something safer, they just need to go through the Property Appropriations and bring it in front and adopt an ordinance. Mr. Mick • I'm asking a question. Collier County has jurisdiction as a whole entity. Mr. Tripp • Yes. Not as a single individual. Mr. Mick • That's all I'm going to add to that. Mr. Walsh • Would you respect the comment that Collier County appoints by ordinance and by State Statute one individual to enforce and interpret their code requirements? Mr. Trip • Yes, 100% if it is a building code issued. But this is a fire code issue. Mr. Melton • This Code, 21, was adopted last year? Mr. Sposito • We adopted that code last year. Mr. Melton • What prompted this concern? Normally I see when the code adoptions and things happen with changes, usually it's as a result of something that impacted Collier County in a safety matter or someone got hurt, that brings light to these situations. I'm just curious to see what prompted it from the Building Department side that you guys took the initiative to make some changes. Mr. Sposito • I know this process started well over a year ago. I wasn't working with the County and was part of the conversations moving forward. Mr. Melton • But where did this come from, Fred (CLUM)? Do you happen to know. Mr. Clum • An inconsistency in review, inconsistency between reviewers? There had been an inconsistency where one did it this way, one did it that way. So we came together and talked about How it should be applied and what the conditions are. We agreed we needed to make this clear. Mr. Walsh or Mr. Melton? • So basically, it was an internal staff conflict that brought this to fruition. When did you start enforcing it externally. Mr. Komarowski • Probably six months ago. Mr. Melton • This is for the County. Do you guys, any of the four of you personally know of any underground residential tanks that have been a problem regarding ignition and it caused a fire and explosion due to a combustion engine sitting over the top of the tank? • Is an electrical vehicle noted as an ignition source in the Code? Mr. Sposito • No. Mr. Walsh • Troy, (Komarowski) do you recall what you would put down as the permit rejection comment. Mr. Komarowski • It probably would have been the distance to the driveway. That’s usually what I start with. Mr. Walsh • Referencing which code? Mr. Komarowski • Code 6.8.6.1 NFPA58 underground tanks but Tripp did mention table 6.4.4.3 for section 6.4 do you believe that applies to underground tanks? Mr. Walsh I make a motion to close the public hearing aspects. Motion passed Mr. Mick I make a motion that The Board of appeals accept the interpretation that Collier County Building Officials and that Jonathan just read included in our packet. That we accept that. Motion died Mr. Melton I make a motion that we do not adopt the interpretation of the Building Department in this matter. Mr. Swanson seconded that motion. The Motion is discussed. Mr. Walsh All those in favor of the motion say aye. Motion passed OLD BUSINESS No old business MEETING ADJOURNED 12:07p.m.