Backup Documents 03/18/2008 W
Board of County
Commissioners
Workshop
Meeting
W / The Fire Review Task
Force
BACK-UP
DOCUMENTS
March 18,2008
AGENDA
March 18, 2008
9:00 a.m.
BCC- Fire Review Task Force Workshop
3rd Floor Boardroom
W. Harmon Turner Building
Tom Henning, Chairman, District 3
Donna Fiala, Vice-Chairman, District 1
Jim Coletta, Commissioner, District 5
Frank Halas, Commissioner, District 2
Fred W. Coyle, Commissioner, District 4
NOTICE: ALL PERSONS WISHING TO SPEAK ON ANY AGENDA ITEM MUST REGISTER PRIOR TO SPEAKING.
SPEAKERS MUST REGISTER WITH THE COUNTY MANAGER PRIOR TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE AGENDA
ITEM TO BE ADDRESSED. ALL REGISTERED PUBLIC SPEAKERS WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES
UNLESS THE TIME IS ADJUSTED BY THE CHAIRMAN.
COLLIER COUNTY ORDINANCE NO. 2004-05, AS AMENDED, REQUIRES THAT ALL LOBBYISTS SHALL, BEFORE
ENGAGING IN ANY LOBBYING ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ADDRESSING THE BOARD OF
RECORDS DEPARTMENT.
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS), REGISTER WITH THE CLERK TO THE BOARD AT THE BOARD MINUTES AND IF YOU
ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS
PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE.
PLEASE CONTACT THE COLLIER COUNTY FACILITIES MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT LOCATED AT 3301 EAST
TAMIAMI TRAIL, NAPLES, FLORIDA, 34112, (239) 774-8380; ASSISTED LISTENING DEVICES FOR THE HEARING
IMPAIRED ARE AVAILABLE IN THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Opening Remarks/Presentation by the Task Force Chair
3. Task Force Report -- Findings and Recommendations
4. Public Comment
5. Adjourn
INQUIRIES CONCERNING CHANGES TO THE BOARD'S AGENDA SHOULD BE MADE TO THE COUNTY
MANAGER'S OFFICE AT 774-8383.
FIRE REVIEW TASK FORCE
INTERIM REPORT
PRESENTED TO: THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MARCH 18,2008
I.) TOPIC: FLORIDA BUILDING AND FIRE CODES
POINT OF INFORMATION: In Florida the construction of buildings IS governed by two
Codes which reference many technical standards.
The Florida Fire Prevention Code which is made up of the National Fire Protection
Associations Uniform Fire Code (NFPA I) and The Life Safety Code (NFPA 101), both have
Florida specific amendments. It is empowered by Section 633.0215, Florida Statutes, and
implemented by Florida Administrative Code (F AC) 69A-60 and overseen by The State Fire
Marshal with The Florida Fire Code Advisory Council. This is the Code that the Fire Code
Official honors.
The Florida Building Code which is based on the International Code Councils International
Building Codes with Florida specific amendments. It is empowered by Section 553,73, Florida
Statutes and implemented by Florida Administrative Code (FAC) 9B-3-047 and overseen by The
Department of Community Affairs with The Florida Building Commission. This is the Code that
the Building Code Official honors.
There are some areas where both govern the similar topics. At the state level effort is made to
make the requirements in harmony, however, if compliance is different, the most restrictive
requirement applies.
Both Codes are simultaneously upgraded on three year cycles. The 2007 versions will take effect
October I, 2008.
2.) TOPIC: EARLY WORK AUTHORIZATION & PHASE PERMITS
ISSUE I: EARLY WORK AUTHORIZATION: Section 105.12 of the 2004 Edition of the
Florida Building Code allows the Building Official to approve a specific amount of work to
proceed prior to issuance of the parent permit. However, the work shall not to proceed past the
first required inspection. It is imperative that the Fire Code Official be informed of the approvals.
It is also important that a system be in place for tracking these projects and a follow up by field
inspectors to make sure that contractors are not going beyond what was approved. A record of
spot checks on the progress should also be instituted with clear records available to fire districts,
code enforcement and building inspectors.
ISSUE 2: PHASE PERMITS: Phase Permits are authorized under Section 105.13 of the 2004
Edition of the Florida Building Code. Phased Permits allow specific construction prior to
obtaining the parent permit: they are obtained with drawings that only show a particular phase of
construction and no other work. All inspections necessary are authorized and required to
3-11-08 - Final
complete the work authorized by the Phased Permit. It is imperative that the Fire Code Official
approve these applications prior to issuance. It is also important that a system be in place for
tracking of these projects and a follow up by field inspectors to make sure that contractors are
not going beyond what was approved. A record of spot checks on the progress should also be
instituted with clear records available to fire districts, code enforcement and building inspectors.
RECOMMENDATION: If spot checks are required then it is recommended that a formal
process be established and an appropriate inspection fee be charged. In addition, the Fire Code
Official as well as the Building Official must sign off on all Early Work and Phased Permits.
ACTION: A process is now in place that requires approval sign off by both the Fire Code
Official and the Collier County Building Official for both processes. A compatible inspection
process must now be developed to assure that only approved work is being performed on site and
the CDES fee schedule must be amended to note the appropriate fee for the respective inspection
service. (See Appendix - Topic 2)
3.) TOPIC- 61G15 - BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS RULES
ISSUE: A building has many components that require the Professional Engineers' control.
To obtain a building permit the Engineer shall prepare engineering documents establishing the
components compliance with the governing codes.
During construction shop/layout documents arc prepared by the installing contractor and will be
used to obtain a sub-permit.
The Florida Building Code requires this process but the Fire Protection components also require
acceptance by the Fire Code Official.
The Fire Code Official established stakeholder advisory groups (see Appendix Topic 3) to
organize the information exchange for these documents. The outcome is policies, procedures and
checklists to that assist the Engineer in predictable document review. The local Fire Alarm
checklist is in the appendix of The National Fire Protection Associations alarm design handbook.
Prior to January I, 2008 the Fire Code Official provided the reviews lor the engineering
documellls and the shop/layout docl/ments. Now the review for the engineering documents is
under the Building Code Official and both Officials review the shop/layout docl/mellls.
Testimony showed a slow down in the review process occurs when there is deviation between
the engineering docl/ments and the shop/lavolII docl/ments. This requires the Engineer to revise
the engineering docl/mellls and/or direct the revision to the shop/layout documents and then
,lbtain the acceptance of the Building/Fire Code Officials before installing the components.
Testimony also showed that the s/lOp/lavout documents were submitted late in the buildings
construction delaying the inspection process.
2
3-11-08 - Final
4.) TOPIC: PERMIT PROCESS & PLAN REVIEW
ISSUE 1: [n the past permits were issued to contractors who were not qualified to do specific
types of work such as commercial hoods or underground gas tanks, but the problem is not
limited to these examples.
RECOMMENDA TION: Ongoing training of intake Permit Techs on the different types of
permits and the types of licenses required completing certain types of work, and the revision of
applications to identify clearly the type oflicense required.
ACTION: County staff has implemented new application forms that will help designate the
specific type oflicenses for certain types of work. Contractor's Licensing Supervisor is currently
training the intake staff to ensure proper licensing.
ISSUE 2: Application documents are not being distributed to the reviewers in a productive
manner creating down time within the department and creating frustration within the industry.
RECOMMENDATION: Purchase a document tracking system to more accurately determine
where documents are and identify where they need to go next.
ACTION: A bar code tracking system has been purchased and is being fielded to electronically
track applications and control the simultaneous distribution of plan sets through out the
department.
ISSUE 3: ELECTRONIC SUBMITTALS.
RECOMMENDA TION: This committee strongly recommends electronic filing of plans.
Electronic filing is used in many municipalities around the country and eliminates quite a bit of
paperwork as well as makes it easier for reviewers and design professionals to talk about issues.
ACTION: Evaluate commercial off-the-shelf software systems to implement an electronic
submittal process.
ISSUE 4: REVIEW TIMES
RECOMMENDA TION: Set a defined level of service for review times which will apply to the
Planning, Fire, and Building Departments with the current review time updated and posted at the
front desk every week.
ISSUE 5: Interaction between Fire. Building and Planning departments during the review
process and how certain types of information are inconsistent on the documents.
RECOMMENDA TION: Increased interdepartmental communication will better serve everyone.
Application documents should be sent to Fire, Planning and Building departments at the same
time and all should have SDP information (formatted as required for each) available for
coordination. Information unrelated to the site plan (detailed building area calculations,
3
3-11-08 - Final
construction type, and suite addresses, etc.) is indicated on the SDP application only. This can be
accomplished with a software program.
5.) TOPIC: PRIVATE PROVIDERS
ISSUE: Private Providers and projects under their control. Private Providers are allowed under
the Florida Building Code and used by owners to review and inspect projects. The Private
Provider is required by law to submit paperwork on review and inspections on regular intervals
to the local jurisdiction. The Committee heard testimony about projects that had been completed
without any paperwork being submitted and of possible Building Code violations on the
approved documents. Note: Private Providers are not allowed to review zoning or Fire Code
Issues.
RECOMMENDA TlON: A lot of changes have occurred over the last year regarding the
handling of this type ofreview and inspection here in Collier County. It is the recommendation
of this Committee that a tracking list of the providers is created in order to look for patterns on
types of problems and/or successes, be it missing review items or inspection reports.
A CTION: A spot check system of reviews and inspections of construction documents, which is
a requirement of the FBC. has been implemented. All issues raised during Fire Review related to
the FBC, and reported to the Building Official are acted upon immediately. Private Providers
with a consistent record of infractions will be reported to the DBPR.
6,) TOPIC: REVISIONS
ISSUE 1: This committee heard testimony about submitting an 8 012" X II" sheet from design
professionals to cut down on the paperwork for certain types of revisions. The issue for the
reviewers is what other items are being affected by this change.
RECOMMENDATION: When a revision is submitted the original filed documents should be
pulled from the records room and passed along with the revision. The Committee heard that
reviewers have to go to records, ask for the file, and then wait while it is found. Another way
around this is better records management and the electronic availability of all these records.
ISSUE 2: Clarifications: There are some instances in which a field inspector might request a
clarification of an item or the intent trom the design professional on a particular set of
documents. That field inspector will also ask that this claritication be submitted for the records.
RECOMMENDA TION: A clear detinition Irom both the Fire and Building Departments of what
a revision is and what a claritication is needs to be established. This is needed to help with
minor changes in the field that are requested or seen by inspectors that do not affect the overall
project or to clari fy the design professionals intent on a certain subject. Plan revisions (caused by
special field conditions), should be simplified by a quick review by both the plan reviewer and
inspector, then with both in agreement, approvals should be expeditiously processed and
contractors should be able to proceed with work in the field. Appointments could be made by the
contractor with the plan reviewer for a walk thru approval of the revision.
4
3-11-08 - Final
ACTION: Request that DSAC look at different types of issues and come forward with a process
for handling revisions in a timely manner.
7.) TOPIC: INSPECTIONS
ISSUE 1: Each of the independent Fire Districts and MSTU Fire Districts schedule inspections
differently.
RECOMMENDA TION: Ask the Fire Service Steering Committee to standardize this process.
ISSUE 2: Contractors are being told to modify rough-in boxes for fire alarm devices, change
wall framing for commercial hoods, and alter framing to run fire sprinkler piping.
RECOMMENDATION: To have DSAC study whether final framing inspection shall not occur
(Building Department will put an inspection hold) until the fire alarm, fire sprinkler, and
commercial hood permits are issued. This approach should help the sub-contractors be ahead of
the game.
ISSUE 3: During a normal inspection of an existing building, when Fire District Inspectors find
building Code issues (such as unpermitted work) that do not fall under Fire District Jurisdiction
yet need to be addressed, Fire Inspectors need to be able to call Code Enforcement and have an
investigator take over and issue a possible a red tag.
ACTION: A working relationship has been established among the Fire Districts, Code
Enforcement, and the Building Department for such items found by the Fire Districts. Also a
process is now in place for the Fire Districts to call Code Enforcement and an inspector to issue a
case number and bring the issue forward for further action.
8.) TOPIC: TECHNOLOGY
ISSUE 1: The Building Department technology is outdated and cannot handle the different
departments and their needs.
RECOMMENDATION: A new software system has been purchased and is in the process of
being implemented for the entire department. The Fire Districts also need to be involved in the
design and implementation of technology upgrades so the system has the information needed by
all parties.
ISSUE 2: The subject of "Red Tagged" jobs came up in a few discussions. Red Tag meaning the
stopping of specific work in violation from that point on until the issue(s) is resolved. With the
existing software it is difficult to tell if a project is red tagged, if the red tag has been lifted, or if
the work is still proceeding without permission.
RECOMMENDA TI0N: A reliable system needs to be set up to track red tags. This needs to be
accessible to the Fire Districts, Code Enforcement, and Building Departments during their
normal days to be able to tell if work is progressing on sites that have a red tag and if further
fines need to be issued.
5
3-11-08 - Final
9.) TOPIC: FIRE ALARMS & MONITORING
ISSUE: The current process of obtaining a tire alann permit is difficult. There is an unacceptable
failure rate of Fire Alarm permit applications.
RECOMMENDA TIONS:
A. The current fire alarm pennit checklists should be re-vamped, should be a guideline only,
and not cause a rejection of the permit.
B. As the fire alann "shop drawings" are contractor derived, the minor clerical and
riser/floor plan discrepancies should be "redline corrected" by the contractor and other
minor corrections are allowed with stipulations.
C. Change in monitoring company on existing fire alarm syslems that do not require new
equipment should be a simple letter of said change.
D. Revisions, minor replacement of fire alarm system components, systems less than
$1,000.00, and monitoring permits if required should be permitted using express
permitting forms to expedite these permits.
10.) TOPIC: DESIGN PROFESSIONALS
ISSUE: One subject that was discussed numerous times was the fact that many of the 61 G 15
documents submittcd by Design Professionals were extremely poor.
RECOMMENDA TION: Design Professionals who consistently turn in incomplete documents
and show a complete lack of knowledge to correct such documents should be reprimanded and in
blatant cases be reported to the State Board of Professionals.
11.) TOPIC: INTERFACE WITH FIRE CODE OFFICAL 'S OFFICE
ISSUE: Design Professionals and General Contractors are able to readily access and
communicate with the Office of the Fire Of1icial via a number of methods. Telephone and email
communications are the most frequently utilized and easily accessed. The Fire Code Official's
Office has placed in practice an accessible telephone response system that attempts to balance
the communications needs and the study time necessary for permit application plan reviews.
Additional methods of access are available via US Mail or a personal meeting with the Fire
Official for a pre-application or post application reviews. The Fire Code Official's office reports
that it attempts to schedule meetings as promptly as possible in response to requests from Design
Professionals. The Fire Code Ofticial's Office accepts walk-in appointmcnts howevcr staff may
not always be available without appointments.
During the course of the meetings conducted by the Fire Review Task Force an invitation to
attend was forwarded to the local contractors via the Collier Building Industry Association
(CBIA). Local contractors did attend to speak on topics in very limited numbers however
audience attendance was noted on several occasions during various topics. The Task Force
members include two (2) local General Contractors & three (3) local Architects.
We have no testimony otherwise.
6
3-11-08 - Final
12.) TOPIC: SIMULT AENOUS REVIEW & SDP PROCESS
ISSUE: Simultaneous Review Process - Building Plans and SDP'S
RECOMMENDA nON: Provide for specific standardized placement of information required
for SDP submittals. All re-submittals must be re-reviewed by Fire Review. Provide a
computerized tracking mechanism to provide key information such as square footage, type of
construction, fire sprinkler intentions etcetera, relating to all SDP submittals but especially
simultaneous reviews. Need to review both the simultaneous review process and the SDP
processes. Discrepancies between the building permit application and the SDP such as building
construction type, square footage or fire sprinkler intentions, should be able to be handled
administratively by the Fire Code Ofticial by adding a letter to the file, when such discrepancies
do not negatively impact the Fire Code, thus not requiring an insubstantial change. This should
be done through the LDC for the long term but added as an administrative adjustment until that
document is in place. Should the building permit application indicate a less fire restive
construction type than the SDP, an insubstantial change would be required. If, however the
building permit application indicates a more fire restive construction type than the SDP, the issue
could be handled administratively by allowing the Fire Code Official to add a letter to the file
ACTION: Assess proposed computer software capability. Provide for an administrative
approval process for some issues if proper computer software is available.
13.) TOPIC: WATER FLOW
ISSUE: Adequate water pressure and flow is essential to Collier County fire protection services
and these requirements are substantially higher than the minimum standards established by the
state. The following is a summary of the issues discussed by the Fire Task Force with
recommendations to improve level of service for Collier County property owners:
I. Local Fire Protection Ordinance Requirement
Collier County Ordinance 2005-32: Fire Prevention and Protection, requires that current
water pressure and flow be determined for each construction project by field test.
Collier County de-rates actual water pressure to 50 PSI based on their interpretation of
NFP A 13, Section 15.2.1.2 which states that adjustments must be made for daily and
seasonal fluctuations, possible interruptions and future demand which is not a common
practice of other municipalities in Southwest Florida. This threshold has been established
after considering historical flow tests and local water pressure standards with an
adjustment for future demand on the system. This means that property owners with water
pressure above this threshold are subject to additional construction cost to make up the
administrative shortfall, while areas with substandard service are subject to additional
construction cost in order to compensate for inadequate level of service.
2. Local Water Service Standard
County Utilities is required to provide 40 PSI (max day fire flow conditions) by Collier
County Ordinance 2004-32 by field test but results are sometimes below this
7
3-11-08 - Final
requirement. This minimum standard is below the de-rated water pressure standard of 50
PSI.
RECOMMENDATION: Water departments and flow test requirements: There needs to be a
standard water pressure requirement for all water service providers to county fire lines and that it
meets minimum fire requirements should have a updated future system expansion plan including
upgrade of the existing so Fire Districts can make plan reviews asking for the most efficient
solutions to flow and pressure requirements. Field inspection revisions (caused by special field
conditions), should be simplified by quick review with plan reviewer and inspector. Then with
both in agreement, the contractor should be able to proceed with work in field. Appointment
could be made by contractor with plan reviewer for walk thru approval of revision. No
amendments to local fire code based on state adopted code. Collier County should require higher
water flow and pressure from the City of Naples, independent service providers and Collier
County Utilities to a level of service commensurate with the impact fees that property owners are
required to pay. Collier County Utilities has the capacity to turn on water pumps that are not
normally used to increase pressure during emergency conditions. The utilization of existing
communication systems and pumping capacity should be investigated to determine if this is a
viable option, even though the fire districts are skeptical of this approach.
14.) TOPIC: SPRINKLER REOUIREMENTS FOR THE COLLIER COUNTY
PARKING GARAGE
ISSUE: This is an example of the problems of simultaneous SDP/Building Permit and Phase
Permitting when each are carrying conflicting information causing in this case the uncertainty of
the need for an automatic sprinkler system in this building.
The SDP noted on the Site Plan Sheet a Type I construction with no sprinkler protection. Noted
on the Utility Plan is a Type IV construction with sprinkler protection, it also classified the
occupancy as an Educational use.
The Construction Documents, in simultaneous permit review, showed a Type IV construction
and was ultimately required to provide an automatic sprinkler system.
. Florida Building Code 200 I Section 903.6 does not require sprinklers
· Florida Statue 553.895(2) exempts freestanding parking structures from
sprinklers.
. Fire Protection Code via NFP A 88A 6.1.3 exempts open parking structures from
sprinklers.
'I he local amendment (Ord. 2005-32) added water flow requirements authorized in the Florida
Prevention Code, NFP A I Section 18.3.1, to Florida NFP A I 13.5.!.1 which required
approximately 6,600 gallons per minute for this building. Available was 2,167 GPM thus the
local factor of 1/2, if sprinkled, was needed to reduce the local need to approx. 3,300 GPM. This
is why the building has an automatic sprinkler system.
RECOMMENDA TlON: Encourage the Fire Districts to establish a study by a Fire Protection
Engineer of the requirements for water flow at open parking garages.
8
3-11-08 - Final
15) TOPIC: FIRE CODE OFFICIALS AREAS OF MAJOR CONCERN
POINT OF INFORMATION: The Fire Code Office presented to the Fire Review Task Force
examples of building permits where Collier County caused by past administration, was not
following the minimum code requirements. The following are just some examples illustrating the
concerns that the Fire Districts have. The major concerns reviewed by the Task Force have
included: non-compliance of code by private providers, outstanding permits and issues with
various county projects, past problems with Early Start Letters and Phased Permits.
If anyone would like to view additional documentation and complete historical information,
please contact the Fire Code Official's office at 239-252-3473, as per a public record request.
ISSUE]: Private Provider Non-Compliance with Building Codes: Collier County, as
allowed by the State, has accepted building applications that have been reviewed and approved
by a Private Provider as meeting the minimum Building Codes for the State of Florida. Even
after it has been noted by the Fire Code Official that Building Code violations exist, no Building
Code review will be performed by Building Code Official. The Fire Code Official has
forwarded written Building Code deticiencies to the Building Department and as of late, the
practice of forwarding them to the Private Provider for correction has been instituted by Collier
County. The Fire Code Ofticialnoted deficiencies are a byproduct of the Fire Code review and
do not imply a complete building review was performed. It presented that the only the intention
of the Fire Code Official: is to make the Building Department aware of these deficiencies so that
a thorough review could be performed by them. Per the County Attorney Office, the Building
Code Official does not have to perform this building review, as it could be considered a
duplication of reviews. The utmost concern should be the safety and welfare of the citizens of
Collier County, especially in light of the fact that there is no duplication of Building Code
review. The policy that is in place at this time is to forward the items found by the Fire Code
Official, to the Private Provider for corrections.
ISSUE 2: Outstanding permits and issues with various Collier County's Projects:
. Required Fire Sprinkler System for the Collier County Parking Garage
. Non-Code Compliant Revision to Collier County Court House Annex.
. Temporary CO for the Collier County Waste Water Reclamation Facility.
. Outside Air Units for the Development Services Building.
. Installation of New Boilers at the County Jail.
Issues are further elaborated in Appendix Topic 15 Issue: 2
ISSUE 3: EARLY START LETTERS OR PHASED PERMITS:
. Collier County Parking Garage
. Flea Market
. Immokalee Senior Housing
. Sway Lounge
9
3-11-08 - Final
Issues are further elaborated in Appendix Topic 15 Issue: 3
Action: It is recommended that further review is needed to move these permit problems and
issues to resolution. Since government policy dictates that all project permits need to be
finalized, we urge appropriate action be taken immediately to finalize these permits.
16.) TOPIC: AREAS OF BUILDINGS
ISSUE: A building has different methods of measuring its area. The documents submitted are
unclear on how the value was derived. This causes inaccurate use and time of staff to clarify.
RECOMMENDA TION: Require the documents to note the following areas.
I. Florida Building Code:
· General Building Areas per Section 502.1
. Gross Floor Area per Section 1002.1
. Net Floor Area per Section 1002.1
2. Florida Fire Prevention:
· Gross Floor Area per FFPC NFPA 1 3.3.97.1
· Net Floor Area per FFPC NFPA I 3.3.97.2
· Gross Floor Area per FFPC NFP A 101 3.3.16.2.1
· Net Floor Area per FFPC NFPA 1013.3.16.2.2
· Gross Leasable Area per FFPC NFPA 101 3.3.16.2.3
3. Collier County Land Development Code
· Floor Area per Collier LDC Section 1.08.00
· Floor Area for Parking per Collier LDC Section 4.05.04
4. Collier Impact Fee Square Footage
· per Collier Code of Laws and Ordinances Chapter 74-108
. See Appendix Topic 16.
17,) TOPIC: LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA FIRE
PREVENTION CODE
ISSUE: See Appendix Topic 17 for the status of Local Amendment items
RECOMMENDA TIONS: The Board of County Commissioners should allow the local
amendment to the Florida Fire Prevention Code 2005-32 to sunset or be repealed on October I,
2008. Future amendments to the Florida Fire Prevention Code should be adopted by the Fire
Districts, including the MSTU Fire Districts.
10
3-11-08 - Final
IS.) TOPIC: COLLIER COUNTY BOARD of COUNTY COMMISSIONIERS
ISSUE1: Complaints regarding the Fire Code Official's office should be referred to the Fire
District Administrating the Fire Code Official's Office.
ISSUE2. Complaints for all Fire inspections should be directed to the appropriate governing Fire
District.
RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 633.121, Florida Statutes, authority given by The
State Fire Marshal to the Independent Fire Districts for the enforcement of The Florida Fire
Prevention Code is out of the domain of The Board of County Commissioners.
11
3-11-08 - Final
Appendix
ISSUE 2: Collier County's Projects
Collier County's Design Professionals have not been proactive in responding to code
deficiencies as listed by the Fire Code Official. This is evidenced by either avoidance of the
issues or avoidance of answers to the cited code deficiencies and an unwillingness to stop the
scheduled work to proceed. The following are some examples:
ISSUE 2.1: Required Fire Sprinkler System for the Collier County Parking Garage: This
building was cited as requiring a fire sprinkler system in the original plan review. This open
parking garage look live corrections to get approved. This building was issued a building
permit on 3/14/06: however, this building was up six stories and 90% completed per the
threshold inspector report just two days after the building permit was issued.
ISSUE 2.2: Non-Code Compliant Revision to Collier Court House Annex; A revision was
submitted for the third floor build-out to provide a training facility in which the occupant load
would exceed 50 persons. The Fire Code Official had this revision on hold as the minimum
number of exits was not provided for the proposed occupant load; this requirement is also noted
in the Florida Building Code. As a solution to the minimum code requirements of the Building
Code, the Building Depa11ment Review office accepted two training rooms of 568 sq ft each
with four fixed chairs (142 sq ft per chair) as a way to reduce the occupant load. In addition, a
sign would be placed to state," A maximum occupant load of 30 persons". This was not
acceptable to the Fire Code Official. During correction #4 of this said revision, the architect
complied with the minimum codes. This one revision took the architect live months to provide
compliant drawings for approval.
ISSUE 2.3: Temporary CO for the Collier County Waste Water Reclamation Facility: The
Director for Collier County Public Utilities, had a meeting with the East Naples Fire Marshal on
March 7, 2006 to request a Temporary CO, as the new addition and remodel of this facility did
not comply with the minimum fire codes or the requirements for vertical accessibility as outlined
in the Florida Building Code (FBC).
Due to issues beyond the County's control, it was agreed by all parties that the Collier County
Utilities Department would be allowed to occupy this building with the understanding, via
written letter from the Utilities Director. to have lull compliance by January I. 2007. On
December 18, 2006, the Utilities Director authored a letter to the previous Building Official,
stating Ihat this space would be re-assigned to work area, thus no compliance with the previous
agreement would be neccssary. As of this date. this building is non-compliant with the Fire
Codes and may not meet the handicap requirements of the Florida Building Code this building
has an expired Temporary Certificate of Occupancy as of 9/4/2006 and has no Cel1ificate of
Occupancy and is currently occupied and fully operational.
ISSUE 2.4: Outside Air Units for the Development Services Building: had live, 6-ton OSA
units installed that did not comply with the automatic shut down requirements of both the
, 'echanical Code and NFPA 90A. This pennit was issued by the Fire Code Official with a
12
3-11-08 - Final
stipulation because the units were already installed. As of this date, this permit is still in the
issue status and no corrections have been provided, although the work is completed.
ISSUE 2.5: Installation Of New Boilers at the County Jail: A contractor requested
permission to start up new boilers located on the Collier County campus. When questioned, it
was noted that no building permit was submitted for this installation. On November I, 2007 this
building permit was submitted for review and was rejected by the Fire Code Official. To this
date, no corrections have been provided, however the work is completed.
ISSUE 3: Early Start Letters or Phased Permits
While this issue seems to have been corrected with the new Building Official, the Fire Code
Official is compelled to note that many projects have been cited as an ongoing problem due to
the improper implementation of these provisions by the Building Department. The following are
a few notable examples of buildings that incurred substantial problems when trying to conform
to the applicable minimum codes after construction commenced:
ISSUE 3.1: Collier County Parking Garage: Construction was completed up to six floors
from an early start letter prior to the approval of a building permit.
ISSUE 3.2: Flea Market: This is a 2002 building permit still in the apply status. This building
is nearly completed, however, based on an early start letter, which then progressed into an illegal
phase permit. To date, this building still does not have an approved building permit.
ISSUE 3.3: Immokalee Senior Housing: On March 29, 2005, this building permit was issued
without the approval by the Fire Code Official. On July 19, 2005 during the simultaneous
review, it was noted the construction type did not comply with the minimum established per the
approved SDP. This was noted and a field inspection was performed by both the Fire Code
Official and the Building Department. With the construction type of this building, up two floors
prior to a fire code approval, being a different construction type than what was approved at SDP,
it compounded the already problematic lack of fire fighting water supply. This was brought to
the attention of the Building Department: however, the contractor was permitted to continue even
with fire code deficiencies and the concerns from the Fire Department for available fire fighting
water supply.
ISSUE 3.4: Sway Lounge: This permit was a fast track project, as it was the entrance into the
East Naples Triangle. The building permit was submitted into Development Services on
8/26/05: however it was also issued an early start letter on 9/1/05 just 4-days after the permit was
submitted. While there were major code issues for this project, the Building Department
approved their review for this permit on the first submission while Fire Code Official had this
permit on hold. It took the architect three corrections to provide all the required information for
approval. During the construction phase, there was a revision rejected by the Fire Code Official
but the contractor was given permission to continue with construction, despite the Fire Code
deficiencies listed. This permission was granted by the Building Depmiment.
13
3-11-08 - Final
Fire Alarm Committee
;\>Iembers
(Revised 07/18/07)
Don Baer
North Naples Fire
Depal1ment
239-597-9227 Ottice
239-597-3522 Facsimile
Nick Biondo
East Naples Fire Control
& Rescue District
239-774-2800 Office
239-774-3116 Facsimile
Joe Burgess
Burgess Engineering
941-274-0020 Office
941-274-0021 Facsimile
Charles Coffey
Sonitrol (Operations
Manager)
565-2196 Cellular
Pat Ellendorf
ADT
941-938-3286 Facsimile
941-275-7565
Bob Graf
941-592-7933 Oftice
941-777-1584 Cellular
Jason Aimaro
Beaumont
Communications. Inc.
941-643-76350ftice
941-643-8560 Facsimile
;\1 aggie J ani
Collier County Fire
Codc Ofticial's Ofticc
239-436-3711 Office
239-436-3750 Facsimile
Gerry Jeffries
Safe Tech, Inc.
239-596-42000ftice
239-598-9452 Facsimile
239-707-8728 Cellular
Rich King
BSE (Building Systems
Evaluation)
239-334-4217 Office
239-334-8096 Facsimile
633-7028 Cellular
Bill Lee
SIMPLEXGRINNEL
941-939-4456 Office
941-939-7537 Facsimile
Ricco Longo
Collier County Fire
Code Ofticial's Office
239-403-2498 Office
239-403-2393 Facsimile
Andre Malepart
GoldCoast Fire &
Security
239-454-44] 7 Facsimile
239-822-3157 Cellular
Bob Martineau
SIMPLEXGRlNNEL
941-939-4456 Oftice
941-939-7537 Facsimile
.Jim McGregor
Safety Signal Systems
415-U60 I Office
415-4630 Facsimile
91 0-770U Cellular
TOPIC 3
Brian McMahon
Executive Electronics
239-597-9077 Oftice
239-597-9012 Facsimile
239-250-3642 Cellular
adm in(iIeesecuri ty.net
Ed Munson
Wayne Automatic
433-3030 Office
433-3263 Facsimile
707-3479 Cellular
Ed Riley
Collier County Fire
Code Official's Office
239-436-3711 Office
239-436-3756 Facsimile
Chuck Simonson
GoldCoast Fire &
Security
239-454-4417 Facsimile
239-822-3157 Cellular
Steven Stafford
S.R. Stafford
Engineering
239-948-5841 Office
239-948-5990 Facsimile
Mike Sullivan
Commercial Electrical
Systems
941-931-9132 Oftice
941-931-9859 Facsimile
941-033-1105 Ccllular
Doug White
Guardian Technologics
352-80000ttlce
353-3590 Facsimile
825-8350 Cellular
TOPIC 3
Current Sprinkler Committee Members
Nick Hulme - RJ Vann Mechanical
Bob DiModica Naples Fire Sprinklers
Luis Rodriguez - Coastal Fire Protection
Mark Brant - Mark Brant P.E.
Ed Poole -Wayne Automatic
Russell Johnston- R&T Fire - 10/12/07
Sam Bennet - Metro Fire Protection
Rich King and Mike Kolias - BSE
Dan Deerey - DSD Fire Tech
Juan Hernandez - Spillis Candela DMJM
Dan Wadsworth - Wadsworth O'Neal Engineering
Regan Melanson - Precision Automatic Sprinklers
Ken T annassee - T annassee Fire Protection
Paul Fenna - McDaniel Fire Protection
Leo Rodgers - IFD
Nick Biondo and Brian Quinn - ENFD
Bill Silvester and Abe Quintanilla - GGFD
Dave Raub and Don Baer- NNFD
Todd Layton - ICFD
Andy Marfongella - BCIFD
Jeremy Johnson, Chainnan - CCFCO
Fire Sprinkler Committee was originally tanned in 2000 and has met as needed.
TOPIC 3
Hood Suppression Committee
We organized a Hood Suppression Committee in December 2007. The tollowing are the
current members of the committee:
Dave Raub North Naples Fire District
Bill Silvester - Golden Gate Fire District
Andy Marfongella -. Big Corkscrew Island Fire District
Nick Biondo or reprcsentative- East Naples Fire District
Leo Rodgers -- lmmokalee Fire District
Randy Meland . ABA Fire Equipmcnt
Todd Jacobs & Bill Dolde - ABC Fire Equipment
Roland Taylor & Heidi Schroyer - Global Fire Equipment
Notice has also been sent to the following companies with no response:
A American Fire
AB Fire Equipment
Atlantic Coast Firc Equipment
Cintas
Fire Equipment Co.
Fire Pro
Fyr-Fyter
Simplex-Grinnell
Wiginton Fire
TOPIC 17
COUNTY ORDINANCE 2005-32 Local Amendments to the Florida Fire Prevention
Code
58-26: These NFPA standards have been adopted because the local Fire Marshal(s) had a
need for them to address unique issues within their district(s).
58-27 (A) (1) Section of N.F.P.A 1 revised 1.10
Board of Appeals: This was changed in County Ord. 2002-49 to comply with the
interlocal agreement between the Fire Districts and the County. Section 10 (3) pg 12. When
County Ord. 2005-32 was adopted it was felt that we should continue to use the County
process. Loss of this section would have no effect.
1.16.4 The language added here is for informational purposes as well as to indicate use of
the Collier County Code Enforcement Board. This is also in the Interlocal Agreement.
Removal of this section have no effect.
1.3.2.1: This section is for infonnational purposes and clarity only. This section provides a
reference to our locally adopted standards to indicate that compliance with them is also
required. Repeal of this section should have no effect on the Fire Districts.
1.3.7: The first paragraph of this section is the same as in the Code. The second paragraph
contains language similar to F.S. 633.025 (6), which has been added here for informational
and clarity purposes. The third paragraph is language based on section 4.5.4 (1), placed
here for informational purposes. Removal of this section will not change the application of
the Code.
4.5.4: This section is for informational purposes and clarity only. This requirement is also
in the Interlocal Agreement. This a fonn that shows that an occupancy has been inspected
and approved as having complied with the appropriate Fire Codes and Standards. Removal
of this section would have no effect.
1.14.2: The only part of this section NOT in the Code is the requirement for the Fire
Protection Plan. Removal of this section would require re-adoption prior to enforcement.
1.17: Permit Fees: This section is tor reference only. Removal will have no effect.
3,3.216,3,3.217,3.3,218,3.3.219,3.3.220: Definitions only. Added for clarity and do no!
change the application of the Code.
Removal will have no effect.
10.11.1: This section requires pennits for open buming as well as language previously
request by a past County Commission, which would further restrict open burning or sale or
use of fireworks under certain conditions. Removing this section would require re-adoption
Rev. 2-27-08
regards to placement. Removal of these sections would require re-adoption prior to full
enforcement. Actuall~ removal would have no effect as'liFPA 14 Sections 5.1.1 and
5,\.2 allow the AHJ to determine the adequacy of these.
13.3.1.1: This section provides for a required safety margin for fire sprinkler design. This
section was added for informational purposes only and complies with NFP A 13 section
15.2.1.2. Removal of this section will have no effect.
13.3.2.1.1: This section requires the installation of a complete tire sprinkler system in
residential buildings containing more than 4 living units. Removal of this section would
have minimal effect, as the new building code requires fire sprinklers in residential
buildings containing more than 3 living units.
13.3.1.7.1.1: This section requires off site monitoring of all installed fire sprinkler systems
EXCEPT those in one and two family dwellings. Removal of this section would require re-
adoption prior to enforcement.
13.5.1.1: This section was included tor informational purposes only. NFPA section 13.5
requires compliance with NFPA 13 and 24. NFPA I section 18.3.1 requires adequate water
be provided tor fire protection. NFP A I sections A 18.3.1 and A 18.3.2 provide guidance on
required water supply. Additionally NFP A 24 requires that the AHJ determine the adequate
water supply. Removal of this section will have no effect.
13.5.1.2: This section provides an acceptable method to design fire mains for a new
project. This section is for infonnational purposes only and is authorized by NFP A I
sections 13.5 and 18.3. Currently the County allows modeling for this purpose. This allows
pipe sizing based upon an UNLIMITED water supply. Our amendment bases the sizing on
actual conditions. Removal of this section will have no effect.
13.5.1.3: This section is for intormational purposes only and is authorized by NFP A
sections 13.5, 18.3 and NFPA 24. Removal of this section would have no effect.
13.5.1.4: Hydrant Spacing Requirements. Authorized by NFP A 1 section 18.3 and
NFP A 24. Removal would have no effect.
13,5.1.5: This section is authorized by NFPA I section 18.3 and NFPA 24. Removal of this
section will have no effect.
13.5.1.6,13.5,1.7, 13.5.1.8: These sections are listed here for inton11ational purposes only.
and are authorized by :--JFPA 1 section 18.3 and NFPA 24. Removal of this section will
have no impact.
13.5.3: This section limits the number of buildings that can be served by a single dedicated
backtlow assembly. Removal of this section would require re-adoption prior to
enforcement.
13.7.1.4.11. 1.1. 13.7.1.4.11.1.2:. Section 1:1.71.4.11.1.1 requires monitoring of most tire
Rev. 2-27-08
3
sprinkler systems. Section 13.7.1.4.11.1.2 requires sprinklers systems activate a visual
device. Removal of these sections would require re-adoption prior to entorcement.
NFPA 101,4.9,4.9.1: This section limits certain activities and uses of open f1ame spark
producing devices in public places. This section was requested by a previous County
Commission. Removal would require re-adoption prior to enforcement.
101 - 9.6.1.11: This section allows the AHJ to require tamper resistant devices in certain
situations. This is authorized by NFPA 72 section 4.4.4.6.1. Removal of this section would
have no effect.
101 - 9.6.3.7: This section was amended for informational purposes only. The decibel
requirement is listed in NFPA 72. Removal of this section would have no effect.
101 - 9.7.4.1: This section requires fire extinguishers in all commercial and multifamily
buildings. Removal of this section would require re-adoption prior to enforcement.
Rev. 2-27-08
4
TOPIC 16
I--------------------------~
: ,--------1:
I' , I
r,-J L_ ,
: 11
~--------------.------------ I II
I r-1...-__'------1_1 r-- ~_..,
: I I I 11
: II I:
: I I I:
exterior ' Second Level I'
: 'II ,I
: I I:
i _ ___ _ _ _.) I L _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ __ _jJ~JJ
-------------------------- I
! I
, I
I I
I I
I I
l__________________________~
Florida Fire PreventionCode
Gro",s FlOfH" Area !NFPA II
Gross Floor Area INFPA lOll
Net Floor Area INFPA II
Net Floor Area INFPA 1011
Gross Leaseable Area INFPA 1011
I------------~-------------..,
I 1----------1 :
, , I
, _ _J I,
: I 1-----11
,.----:---r--------,'--- _, - I III' Ii
'-_ __ -, I ~_-.,
I I I [I Ii
, "
I I' II I,
I I, I',
First Level
, , I'
I I' I
, , II
I ' I
L Ii'
I ..____ ___. ,_. J 11- ..I
i I. I i r ___ _ _jl-~-
-----.-.....--------..---,.--~-"'---_;l "----1
il Ii
" II
11 'I
i t-.;: ....:;-::::: ..:;"= .';;-.::' _:.-;:~ ..;_--~;;: .::'::..:....:.-::: _.: :.;:.;:.-~v- -:.,.-;.::; ....;:-.,:::; .~:;;:....:JJ
Thbi drnwing j'i I'm \tully u~c h) .hi: CnHitl' Fire K.l.:\~t'w Ia'\k l'/)f{'f.
(k.l;''; ilq? n:pn~i;\:ilt ,H:.,,:.q)1~iJ1n:' of ~Hl," ('nl!i{'f CountY-\lIthor... ~bt\ ing: .Juri.,dictiun,
1-------== -=-=-=-":" '::.=~ -==~-=-"':'---...
: I I I
I r---J L_ I
I 1,
r-----(=---===-=---=---=-=---=-~~~~r- __I IL1,
: I II I:
: I II I:
exterior I Second Level II
I I I '
: I II Ii
I I Ii
: 1__.- ~__ ___ _I"...I L _ _ ____ _ ____ _ .J,"'--"
__________________________ I
I I
, I
I I
I ,
I I
l__________________________~
Florida Building Code
General Building Area 1502.11
Gross Floor Area 11002.11
Net Floor Area (1002.11
I-L~.::T
I
I--------------------------~
I I - I ---II
, . I
I' I ~I
J r 1"--'-' !
'l rr- II '-";1
I "I,
1 I First Level ,I I i
I' I I:
I I I'
J L I J:
L [--, r I I:...... __ - _1,--'
--- ---L------------11 - -- - -11
II "
I _I
'L I:
l_ ~"=-=-=-_.-=- _8 . __ _ _.-:- -=-_:-..::..--:.==.- .==.':-:~ "':--:"'--:::-=:'-.J
This drawing is ror study use by the Collier Fire Review Task Force.
I)oe(,j not represent acccptant.~'~ of any Collier County t\othOl'Y Ha"ing Jurisdktion.
r-----------------------------,
I I
: 1-----------1:
'I I
I r- - L I
, I
1===___::-_-=-_-_=---=----=--_-::_-.::;-' I L,
:1 ,-- II -I:
: I I I I:
: I " I:
I 1 exterior I' Second Level ,
I I II
: I ! I I:
'I I I'
: l_ __ _ -' -,___ _ _ _,- J 1_ _ _ _ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ ~-- I
L____...._________________ _I
I
I
I
I
I I
, I
I_____________________________J
Collier LDC Area
---- .~- Floor Area
-- .-_0- -- Floor Area for Parking
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I _.... __', 1_ J L
I, ' I
'-______...._J__. ...L._,..__. _,.___ _ .__. _~__ ____ '
r-----------.------------------,
I ,
I -------- I
I I I ,
I I'
, 1- -' I
I 11----1 I
_I I I '-I
i r -- II _ I
I II i:
I' I:
I I,
I; II
,I I'
[, ,
,I I'
I, Ii
II_~ ---I
_J _I
I
First Level
,
I:
I
.._ M___ ___ _ ___ ___ ______.1 I
1__________.___._____._______________J
This dra'A'in~ b ft)r stud~ ust: b} [he ('uilier Fire RC\'lew 'L'l:'>k ffln:t,
Dot'''' \Hjo{ n'pr"~sent ;!c'~cptan{'t' of :In) Colli'.:/" ()Juot) ,\urbor} I':p,..ing Jllrl...dictiofl.
exterior
I-----------------------------~
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
L~
I
I
I
I
I
Second Level I
I
I
I
I
I
r-
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I I
I I
-----------------------------~
Collier Impact Fee
----.-- Square Footage
I-----------------------------~
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I L~
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I First Level I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
r-
I I
I I
! I
, I
I
I
I
I
- --- --_._--_..----~_._----- -- - ----....
Thts dra.win~ is for stuuy u~e h) the Colliet" Fire Rcyiew T<!sk Fon.~e,
f)oes Hot repl'c~ent :'U,'{'qltan<.'c ~jf an)' Collier County Author)" Ha\ ing ,Jurisdiction.