DSAC Minutes 04/02/20251
REVISED MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING
Naples, Florida
April 02, 2025
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee
Meeting and Collier County, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3:00 PM in
REGULAR SESSION at Growth Management Community Development Department, Room
609/610, 2800 N. Horseshoe Dr. Naples, FL 34104 with the following members present:
Chairman:
Vice Chairman:
William J. Varian
Blair Foley
James Boughton
Clay Brooker
Jeffrey Curl
Laura Spurgeon DeJohn
John English
Marco Espinar
Norm Gentry
Nicholas Kouloheras
Mark McLean
Chris Mitchell
Robert Mulhere
Hannah Roberts – AHAC (Non-voting)
Jeremy Sterk – EXCUSED
Mario Valle
The following County staff were in attendance:
James French, Department Head, GMCD
Mike Bosi, Director – Zoning Division, GMCD
Christopher Mason – Community Planning & Resiliency Division, GMCD
Jaime Cook, Director, Development Review Division, GMCD
Michael Stark, Director, Operations & Regulatory Management Division, GMCD
James French, Department Head, GMCD Designee for Building Review & Permitting Division,
GMCD
Captain Michael Cruz, Collier County Fire Review - ABSENT
Captain Bryan Horbal, North Collier Fire Review
Thomas Iandimarino, Director, Code Enforcement Division, GMCD
Claudia Vargas, Project Manager I, Engineering & Project Management, PUD
Mike Sawyer, Project Manager II, Transportation Planning – Transportation Engineering
Heather Cartwright-Yilmaz, Management Analyst, Staff Liaison, GMCD
2
Any person who decides to appeal a decision of This Board you will need a record of the
proceedings pertaining thereto and therefore may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the
proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal
is to be based, Neither Collier County nor This Board shall be responsible for providing this
record.
1.CALL TO ORDER – CHAIRMAN
Chairman Varian
Development Service Advisory Committee, Wednesday, 2nd April 2025
2.APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chairman Varian motioned to approve
Motion was seconded
Motion passed unanimously
3.APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a.DSAC: March 5, 2025
Jeff Curl – Under the John McCormick item, was it 200K for permits?
Chairman Varian: We might want to ask him when he comes up, just to verify it. I don’t
remember off hand. Any other comments? Hearing none, I can recommend a motion.
Blair Foley: or I'll move to approve the minutes subject to confirmation from Mr.
McCormick on the 200K number.
Chairman Varian motioned to approve Meeting Minutes with that confirmation.
Motion made to approve and seconded
Minutes approved unanimously
4.PUBLIC SPEAKERS
None
5.STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS/UPDATES
a.Manager, Technical Systems Operations [Kevin Summers]
Kevin Summers
•The newly renovated 609/610 conference room features upgraded audio and video
equipment, including four new cameras to enhance presentations and video conferencing.
•The updated layout is designed to support brainstorming, teamwork, and open
discussions.
•There are two main meeting modes: one for formal presentations with microphones on
the desk, and another for internal team brainstorming sessions.
3
•The room includes an AI assistant for minute tracking, action items, and other AI-driven
assistance programs to aid in brainstorming and project initiation.
•The team is still experimenting with the room’s capabilities, and further features will be
showcased as they are developed.
b.Zoning Division – [Mike Bosi, Director]
Mike Bosi
•Petition Scheduling:
o Final window before the summer break (July–August blackout period) is
approaching.
o Petitions must go through the Planning Commission and Board before summer;
otherwise, County Manager’s Office must clear them.
o Only simple, non-complicated petitions will be considered in September.
•Land Use Petitions:
o Steady flow of pre-application meetings continues.
o 13+ petitions scheduled for Board review in the next two months.
o Urban area petitions typically face strong community opposition due to
neighborhood concerns.
•Staffing Updates:
o James Sebo has returned (after 4 months of retirement) as Planner III; making an
immediate impact.
o Planning division is approaching full staffing.
•Hiring Trends:
o Slight uptick in job applicants noted.
o Implications for the job market and broader economy are still unclear.
•Economic Outlook:
o Ongoing discussions about the next 6–12 months of economic activity.
o Monitoring potential challenges closely.
o Team remains focused on maintaining service quality and meeting community
needs.
c.Community Planning & Resiliency Division - [Christopher Mason, Director]
Christopher Mason
•New Preliminary Maps:
o Received preliminary FEMA flood insurance rate maps for interior parts of the
county (~2 weeks ago).
o Follows adoption of coastal maps (Feb 4, last year).
o Covers central Naples, areas east and south of I-75, mainly riverine areas.
o Maps remain preliminary for now.
o Expecting FEMA to initiate open houses and community discussions soon.
o Appeal processes will be outlined in upcoming FEMA communications.
o ~180 new map panels received (hard copy only); digital files still pending.
4
o No major changes noted in Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) yet.
o Easier review/analysis will follow once digital versions are available.
•Timeline & Process:
o Maps originally received in 2019 but delayed by COVID; finally issued Feb 2024.
o Full rollout still expected to take up to 2 years.
o The process includes community meetings, appeal window, information
dissemination, and finalization per FEMA guidelines.
d.Housing Policy & Economic Development Division - [Cormac Giblin, Director]
Cormac Giblin
•Affordable Housing:
o Board approved 120 new affordable housing units this month.
o Brings the FY total to 540 units approved this fiscal year.
•Job Creation:
o 70 new high-wage jobs validated this fiscal year through economic development
assistance agreements.
•Legislative Monitoring:
o Tracking a bill related to rental of accessory dwelling units—discussed by the
Board the same day a related bill advanced.
o Watching companion bills proposing updates to the Live Local Act.
o Potential expansion to allow use in commercial/industrial areas of PUDs.
o Ongoing monitoring of legislative progress.
e. Development Review Division - [Jaime Cook, Director]
Jaime Cook
•Vegetation Removal Affidavit:
o Notary block will be removed—legal confirmed it's not required.
•Right-of-Way Permits:
o Working with the CityView team to make the application process fully electronic,
eliminating the need to complete both a paper form and a digital version.
o Implementation is in progress; expected to be ready in a couple of months,
pending testing and finalization.
•BCC Schedule:
o Due to BCC room renovations, the July 22 meeting has been canceled.
f. Operations & Regulatory Management Division - [Michael Stark, Director]
Michael Stark
•Permitting Activity (March):
o Received 4,655 permit applications.
▪83 related to Hurricane Ian.
5
▪56 related to Hurricane Milton.
•Average intake turnaround time: 1 day (includes verifying submittals and generating
default reviews/inspections).
•Customer Service & Outreach:
o 1,160 visitors to the Business Center.
o 193 visitors to satellite offices.
o 6,243 phone calls answered (up from ~5,700 in February).
•Zoning Front Desk (March):
o Resolved 843 survey conditions.
o Processed 49 short-term vacation rentals.
o Completed 38 right-of-way renewals.
o Hosted 43 pre-application meetings — a high-activity month.
•Department Goals:
o Continue to streamline permit routing to support housing approvals, business
creation, job growth, public safety, tourism, environmental protection, economic
resilience, and alignment with GMP.
•Staffing Snapshot:
358 total positions, with 55 in the hiring pipeline, including:
o 12 in building review/inspections (mainly structural)
o 16 in code enforcement (animal control officers, new park rangers)
o 3 in zoning (planners – Mr. Sebo's return has been a big help)
o 5 in development review
o 9 in operations and regulatory management
o 10 in Domestic Animal Services (including a newly selected manager and various
specialist roles)
•New Responsibilities:
o Department now oversees Parks & Rec, DAS, and the Sports Park.
o Evelyn Tremino’s team has expanded significantly—now managing more
responsibilities heading into budget season.
•Recruitment:
o Upcoming recruitment event still scheduled for April 2025.
o Coordinating with CareerSource and the Collier Building Industry Association.
•Funding & Resource Allocation:
o Restricted fees are being used appropriately—no commingling of building
department funds.
o Staff from Parks & Rec and Domestic Animal Services have been reassigned
appropriately to maintain department separation (e.g., Desk A vs. Desk B
distinction noted).
g.Building Review & Permitting Division, GMCD Department Head - [James French]
James French
•Occupancy & Completion Certificates (March):
o Certificates of Occupancy (COs): just under 240
o Certificates of Completion (CCs): just under 2,900
6
▪Includes nearly 1,000 completions that fell short of full CO.
o Temporary COs (TCOs): 75
o Total completions/occupancies issued: nearly 4,200
•Fire Plan Review Discussion (Greater Naples Meeting):
o A Fire Commissioner raised the idea of the fire district taking over fire plan
reviews, currently handled under an interlocal agreement with the County.
o Current fire review turnaround: 1–3 days, with strong customer service from Tom
Mastroberto’s team.
o Financial concern:
▪County currently covers 100% of the Fire Marshal’s salary.
▪Districts pay nothing yet collect fees from fire plan reviews.
▪A fee study was recommended to evaluate cost alignment (especially for
North Collier or Greater Naples).
o Noted that independent fire districts cannot carry forward revenue like the County
can, limiting their financial flexibility.
o The County is not opposing the request; the decision lies with the fire district.
▪Regular meetings have been scheduled to improve communication and
assess staffing needs.
▪There has been minimal prior communication from the district until this
recent inquiry.
•Licensing & Permitting Protocols:
o Spoke at the Board of County Commissioners about license investigations:
▪Licenses are held at the state level (Florida), not by the County.
▪If a valid license is provided, the County must issue the permit.
▪County cannot investigate or invalidate state-issued licenses.
o New internal feature allows staff to record design professionals’ licenses in the
commercial permit system.
▪Not a legal requirement, but now standard internal practice.
▪Enables search functionality by design professional.
▪Developed with input from CityView, Jason Badge, and Kevin Wes.
▪System was tested last weekend, which may have caused minor permit
submission issues.
o Purpose of the update is to enhance safeguards for property owners, businesses,
and occupants.
o Clarified that local government issues do not apply to state licensing, though
legislation for local specialty contractors is pending.
o Issued a statement related to design professionals, including one architect who
misinterpreted it as a blanket rejection of signed/sealed permits—this is not the
case.
Chairman Varian asked if the County is processing 200,000 permits by hand.
James French: Clarified that while permits are digital, each permit still needs to be carefully
reviewed to ensure accuracy. The process is time-consuming, especially as contractors hold the
permits, and architects or engineers might not be involved in every detail. Even though
7
everything is digital, it's not as simple as just reviewing a minor permit—small projects like
railings or steps can require a detailed review.
Chairman Varian asked about CityView and commercial permits:
James French: Confirmed that all permits involving design professionals are processed through
CityView, regardless of the project size.
Chairman Varian asked about small projects (e.g., bathroom remodels) not requiring a design
professional:
James French: Clarified that general contractors or owner-builders typically handle such
projects, and the paperwork goes through a review process by staff, followed by a secondary
review by a plan reviewer. While this is common in Florida, the situation in Collier is significant.
Chairman Varian complimented John for his excellent customer service:
James French: Acknowledged John’s exceptional customer service, noting his engineering
knowledge and his long-standing community ties. The County’s goal is to keep processes
efficient while ensuring that all legal requirements are met. If there is a lawful way to speed up
the process without compromising quality, the team is fully in favor of it.
Chairman Varian inquired about AI in the review process:
James French: Shared that the County is leveraging Bluebeam's AI capabilities, integrated with
CityView, to streamline plan reviews. AI helps detect changes in incoming plan sets, speeding up
review times. However, it does not replace the need for licensed professionals. The County has
also developed an alternative reviewer training path, allowing new staff members like Brooke to
start reviewing under supervision while preparing for certification.
Additionally, GIS functions have been brought in-house, which enhances the integration of data
across County systems, as GIS plays a critical role in departmental mapping and analysis.
h.Collier County Fire Review – [Michael Cruz, Captain] Absent
James French covered them both
i.North Collier Fire Review – [Bryan Horbal, Captain]
•Last month, 1295 new construction inspections were completed, with a one-day
turnaround, sometimes even the same day if needed.
•588 building construction and fire permit reviews were conducted, with a two-day
turnaround.
•47 planning permits were processed, also with a two-day turnaround.
8
•The county has now consolidated fire alarm permits into one permit, which simplifies the
process by allowing everything to be handled under one permit, with the same contractor
and plan set, though the fees and review process remain the same.
•The return to a single fire alarm permit system is a shift back to the previous model,
which contractors familiar with the system may recall. This change is also in line with
existing state statutes regarding Fast Track, over the counter, and self-issuing permits. A
new House Bill could introduce further changes to this process, which is being closely
monitored.
j.Code Enforcement Division – [Thomas Iandimarino, Director]
Thomas Iandimarino
•Foreclosures are ongoing, including:
o A recent foreclosure in Goodland
o A couple of vacant lots in Immokalee
•The focus is shifting away from grass-cutting and property upkeep, which has been
handled by code enforcement. While a few properties will still be managed, once liens
reach $5,000 to $7,000, properties will be foreclosed on, even if they sell for only
$15,000 to $20,000. This allows for cost recovery and returns the property to the
community.
•A commercial lot in Golden Gate City is also being foreclosed. The owner abated the
violation, but the foreclosure continues due to four years of inaction despite being given
time to resolve the issue. The owner asked for more time, but the foreclosure proceeded.
•The owner, who has other properties in the county held under separate LLCs, resolved
code violations on those properties. He applied for code lien relief and is now paying a
reduced amount to settle the liens based on an ordinance passed a few years ago.
Clay Brooker asked about permit fees being the largest number
Thomas Iandimarino explained that there has been an ongoing issue with contractors failing to
pay final inspection or Certificate of Occupancy (CO) fees, which has been accumulating for
years (some cases dating back five or six years). Currently, about 20 new cases are being
processed weekly, typically involving 9 or 10 properties or contractors. These cases have already
been managed by Michael Stark's team, who have collected many of the fees. Now, property
owners are typically stepping in to pay the outstanding fees, which are usually around $100 or
$120, although some cases involve higher amounts. Once the property owners pay, the issue is
resolved.
k.Public Utilities Engineering & Project Management Division, PUD [Claudia Vargas
Project Manager I]
Claudia Vargas
•Our utility standard manual was approved by the Board 325.
9
l.Transportation Management Services, Engineering Division – [Mike Sawyer]
Mike Sawyer
•Access Management update
o The updated documents have been distributed internally and to the industry, with
no major changes or significant suggestions. Jay and Tony requested the inclusion
of signal spacing in the deviation process, which has now been incorporated. The
final review phase with Jay and Tony is underway, and the goal is to bring the
materials to a hearing before the BBC, targeting May 27 hearing.
•Airport Road Six-Lane project
o A public information meeting was held last Thursday regarding the six-lane
project for Airport Road (from Vanderbilt Beach Road to the airport). The
meeting focused on the 60% plans, and the project is now moving toward the 90%
phase, with construction still expected to begin in late 2026.
•City Gate traffic signal
o The construction contract for the second traffic signal at City Gate on Collier
Boulevard is heading to the Board of County Commissioners, with construction
expected to begin later this year.
Robert Mulhere asked about right turn on Davis and Collier:
Mike Sawyer
The right turn at the intersection of Davis and Collier is part of the FDOT Interchange project,
which includes a flyover in that location.
Marco Espinar asked about the Golden Gate Parkway meeting on the 10th:
Mike Sawyer
The meeting regarding Golden Gate Parkway, scheduled for the 10th, was postponed because the
consultant wasn’t ready. The meeting will be rescheduled, and notification will be provided once
it is confirmed.
6.NEW BUSINESS
a.PL20250000524 Publication of Legal Advertisements for Neighborhood Information
Meetings LDCA [Angela Galiano, Planner II, Zoning Division]
Angela Galiano
•LDC amendment
o The amendment offers a cost-effective and efficient solution by allowing NIM
notices to be published on the county clerk's website, aligning with modern trends
in public notice publications. This change ensures transparency while lowering
costs for petitioners.
10
o The LDC amendment brings cost savings, convenience, efficiency, and
consistency. The county has already implemented digital publication for
ordinances and other legal notices.
o Subcommittee review (March 18, 2025): The committee recommended the
removal of “on-the-website” from the administrative code and verification with
Florida State statute. The staff revised the text to remove the reference and
confirmed with the county attorney that Florida Statute 50.311 is not needed, as
Chapter 50 already covers it.
o Additional changes: The county attorney, Heidi, recommended adding new text
on page 4, line 21, stating “15 days prior to the public hearing in accordance with
section 125.66.” These changes were made after the copy was sent to Heather.
Rich met with Heidi this morning, and she suggested including this section.
Motion made to approve and seconded
Motion approved, and passed
b.PL20250000235 - Floating Solar Facilities (F.S. 163.32051) LDCA – [Richard
Henderlong, Planner III, Zoning Division]
Richard Henderlong
•The amendment is statutorily mandated and requires local governments to define floating
solar facilities as a permitted use in appropriate land use categories. Local governments
must promote the expanded use of floating solar technologies.
•Floating Solar Benefits
o Floating solar panels are appropriate use of land and water. They are 15–20%
more efficient than ground-mounted systems due to cooling effects. They also
help to decrease water lost and reduce water evaporation and algae growth. These
facilities are beneficial and should be located in specific areas such as lime rock
mine areas, stormwater treatment ponds, abandoned wastewater treatment ponds,
reclaimed water ponds, and other water storage facilities.
•Buffer & Landscape Requirements
o The statute authorizes the County to specify buffer and landscape requirements
for floating solar facilities, but they cannot exceed existing uses or similar uses
involving the construction of other solar facilities permitted in agricultural land
use categories and zoning districts.
•Location Requirements
o It cites the beneficial uses of where floating solar facilities are to be located on
abandoned limerock mining areas, stormwater treatment and wastewater
treatment ponds and other water storage facilities
•LDC Subcommittee Review
o The LDC Subcommittee reviewed the proposed text changes and staff
incorporated their recommendations. One suggestion was to consider allowing
floating solar facilities in residential zoning districts through the conditional use
process or why not allow them in a residential zoning district. The reason is
because RSF-1 zoned lots that are in Pine Ridge subdivision, off of Trail Blvd.
and Center St., have lot lines into a lake and cannot be centralized unless all lot
11
owners agree to centralize ownership. Staff felt the best way to handle it, would
be through the conditional use process or PUDs with residential to amend the
PUD.
•Statutory Reference Clarification
o A question was raised about statutory references to section50.011 vs. 50.0311 was
correct. The revised draft confirms F.S. 50.0311 is the correct citation.
•Changes to Revised Procedural Inconsistencies Draft: Key legal advertising updates
include:
o Page 13, line 10: The text remains for Coastal construction zone setback
requirements that legal advertising shall be in county newspapers under the
provision of 50.011
o Page 22: Throughout the rest of code, under 10.03.06 Public Notice and Required
Hearings for Land Use Petitions, is the standardized phrasing “legal advertising
prior to each advertised public hearings”.
o Pages 22 and 26: The removal of "in accordance with Florida Statute 125.66" is
because the existing provision is stated in LDC 10.03.05
o Strike throughs are highlighted in yellow.
o New definition for "comparable use determination" on page 6, per the
subcommittee's recommendation.
•Staff sought approval for the Floating solar facilities proposed changes based upon the
revisions and subcommittee feedback.
Clay Brooker asked if floating solar facilities in residential zoning districts can apply through
the conditional use process?
Richard Henderlong
•Floating Solar Facilities: Explained that floating solar facilities will be allowed by right
in specific zoning districts, including rural agriculture, estates, public use district, and
community facilities district. As accessory uses, they will be permitted in C-1 through C-
5 Commercial, Travel Trailer-Recreational Vehicle Campground, Industrial and Business
Park districts. These districts are similar to those adopted by other Florida communities.
•Conditional Use in Residential Areas: While not allowed by right in residential
districts, they may be approved through the conditional use process.
•Challenges: Highlighted concerns for residential communities are compatibility with
surrounding areas, glare, effect on littoral shelf, impacts on stormwater management, lake
management ownership by HOA or public use facility issues.
•PUDs: It was noted that the use could be allowed in a residential PUD when a PUD is
amended and approved. It’s probably not going to be a use in the majority of residential
districts; however, it is unknown whether a residential PUD with a massive stormwater
lake that is not land locked by single family residential lots is an appropriate conditional
use. It was discussed whether there should be a limit to residential conventional zoning
districts and not a residential PUD or PUD amendment.
12
•Fencing: Fencing requirement was eliminated from the text.
•Environmental Considerations: Discussed the variability in the environmental impact
of floating solar installations in aquatic preserves and environmentally protected lands,
tidal waters, bay or saline waters, including factors like water body, water depth,
anchoring conditions, and leaching from panels. Long term monitoring will be required.
•Maintenance: Solar facilities require ongoing preventive maintenance, including
cleaning, inspections, and dealing with potential environmental hazards like bird
droppings. Staff will look to the applicant to provide an on-site preventive maintenance
plan including a siting assessment and on-site condition characteristics as listed on page
17.
•Deployment and Dismantle Plan: Explained the need for a deployment (onsite staging
and phasing) and dismantle plan at end of the facilities lifecycle, including procedures for
repair and maintenance, such as after an event of hailstorm.
•The county’s water and sewer district, off Goodlette Road, is undertaking a feasibility
study, at its 40 acres site, to defray electric costs.
Waterway Concerns: Addressed concerns about floating solar facilities impacting water
quality, especially in impaired waters or sensitive habitats.
Clay Brooker
Questioned why to limit the conditional use process if a large residential PUD with a stormwater
lake could potentially work for floating solar facilities. Supported the flexibility of conditional
use.
Marco Espinar
Raised concerns about applying floating solar facilities in stormwater management areas and
residential developments, especially those designed to attract wildlife. Felt that the long-term
consequences were not fully understood, especially minimal impacts. It’s appropriate for some
areas and not others. There are conflicts in attracting wading birds and amenities for fishing by
neighbor kids. It can alter fish spawning, temperatures, salinity, and not an appropriate use.
Jeff Curl
Asked about the deployment plan, especially for repairs after damage (e.g., hailstorms).
Expressed concerns about the environmental impacts on impaired waters and habitats. Site and
environmental assessments are important to understanding the environmental impacts and its
location.
Laura Spurgeon DeJohn
Suggested staff consider a smaller approach allowing it as Public and Institutional land uses and
after a few years of experience, then in phase two to other areas. Recommended adding a
criterion to requirements, number 9, regarding the safety of aircraft navigation due to glare from
solar panels and the proposed facility does not create a hazard to aircraft.
13
Blair Foley
Agreed with Marco and Laura’s concerns, suggesting a phased approach to implementing
floating solar facilities in more suitable locations and could not support it, specifically due to
environmental reasons.
Eric Johnson (Planning Manager)
Suggested considering making all floating solar facility applications conditional uses instead of
permitted by right if the group was concerned about their suitability in Collier County.
Richard Henderlong (Follow-up):
Ms. DeJohn asked, doesn’t the statue say local governments must declare where they are
permitted? Rich confirmed that local governments must permit floating solar facilities in selected
districts, but they can narrow it down to certain districts including agricultural zoning districts.
Mark McLean:
Proposed a motion to approve PL 2350000235 floating solar facilities with the addition of
defining "minimal" (as requested by Marco) and adding item 9 a criterion regarding aircraft glare
(as requested by Laura).
Jeff Curl Seconded
Five Committee Members Opposed
Motion Passed 10 to 5.
c.PL20250000180 - Procedural Inconsistencies, Legal Advertisements, and Land use
Corrections LDCA [Richard Henderlong, Planner III, Zoning Division]
Richard Henderlong
•The amendment is to resolve contradictory statements and inconsistencies with
respective advisory board and public agencies review of various land use petitions.
•PL20250000180 Amendment:
o Directed by the Planning Commission in 2023, the second group of
amendments are updates to LDC and administrative code, including the
following:
▪Codification of the definition for "comparable use."
▪Affirms, in LDC section 8.10.00, the Board can remand any advertised
public hearing involving a development order to the Hearing Examiner
(HEX) on a legal or technical land use issue raised during the hearing.
▪Updates to electronic and digital submission requirements for SDP,
SIP, and construction plans.
▪Changes to various review authority titles.
▪Legal advertisement changes to be published on the Clerk’s public
notice website.
▪Clarifications regarding minor changes to PUDs (e.g., removing
affordable housing contributions) be heard by the HEX and staff
administratively handling certain text changes.
14
▪Review procedures for Type 3 applications and correction of its
graphic depiction.
▪Changes have been reviewed by legal and highlighted in yellow.
•Lighting and Landscape Plan Requirements:
o The document initially removed lighting from the LDC sections, raising
concerns about who should be responsible for preparing lighting plans.
o Jeff Curl questioned the removal of lighting and noted the requirement for a
licensed landscape architect for landscape, irrigation, and lighting plans under
ICPs.
o The LDC needed clarification on whether lighting plans should be signed by a
licensed landscape architect or another professional.
o A suggestion was made to modify the administrative code to allow for lighting
plans to be submitted by any "licensed professional" in Florida, rather than
limiting it to a landscape architect or engineer.
o The change would ensure uniformity and clarify qualifications for
professionals handling these plans.
Jeff Curl asked why lighting was removed from the document, especially since it's part of the
work Jeff handles (landscape, irrigation, and lighting).
Richard Henderlong explained that after reviewing Insubstantial Construction Plans, chapter
5.E.2 of the administrative code, it was requested to add landscape architects as licensed
landscape professionals to sign for lighting, landscaping, and irrigation plans. However, the
request would affect other sections (5 E.1, SDP 4.I.2., SDPI and PPLs) of the code and requires
further research and public vetting before finalizing any change.
Robert Mulhere mentioned plats and SDPs include landscape and irrigation plans prepared by a
licensed landscape architect. He asked if it is necessary to require a landscape architect for
lighting plans if they aren’t changing the landscaping or irrigation.
Richard Henderlong acknowledged that this issue needed more clarity and additional research.
He mentioned that lighting for street projects (which require engineers) is different from
residential or non-engineering lighting, which may not need an engineer or landscape architect.
Chris Mitchell asked if minimum code transportation related lighting requires lighting plans to
be signed by a professional engineer for roadways or lighting.
Richard Henderlong clarified that street lighting does require certification from a professional
engineer, but for low-voltage lighting, changes to the code might be needed.
James Boughton mentioned most of the studies are photometrics and are not engineering and
photometrics are done by a computer program.
Chris Mitchell mentioned wiring diagrams are not part of the permit. Light poles and fixtures are
part of the permit.
15
Laura DeJohn asked why the administrative code does not allow for any "licensed professional"
in Florida to submit lighting plans, instead of limiting it to a landscape architect or engineer.
This suggestion led to a broader agreement to change the language to allow for flexibility, stating
that lighting plans can be submitted by any licensed professional in the state of Florida who is
qualified to do such work.
Blair Foley said when working on the county’s stormwater ordinance, this was a similar
discussion as to whether a PE or the design professional could prepare lot drainage plans. If it’s
a Typed 1 stormwater plan, a design professional or even a contractor can prepare it and if it’s a
Type 2 plan, a PE is required. In his experience, there are qualified landscape architects who can
prepare a drainage plan and then not others who can cause unintended consequences.
James Boughton mentioned that clients can go to the manufacturer of light poles who will do
the photometrics, so long as the client buys their equipment.
Motion to Approve Amendment
Motion by Robert Mulhere: A motion was made to approve the proposed amendment (PL 2025
P0180), including the changes discussed, and add the language to the administrative code to
allow for lighting plans to be submitted by any licensed professional in Florida.
Chairman Varian asked if there is a second
Item was seconded and the motion passed unanimously
7.OLD BUSINESS
None
8.COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS
None
9.ADJOURN
There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned at
4:35 p.m.
X