Loading...
DSAC Minutes 06/01/2011June 1,2011 CE\VEO MINUTES OF THE COLLIER COUNTY R~L 1 2 201PEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING _ " ('1 Count'! CO\llmiSsioners r$.),~l -.) ). June 1, 2011 - Naples, Florida LET IT BE REMEMBERED that the Collier County Development Services Advisory Committee, having conducted business herein, met on this date at 3:00 PM in REGULAR SESSION in Conference Room #610, Collier County Growth Management DivisionIPlanning & Regulation, 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, Florida, with the following Members present: CHAIRMAN: Vice Chair: William Varian David Dunnavant Ray Allain James Boughton (Excused) Clay Brooker Laura Spurgeon Dejohn Dalas Disney Marco Espinar Blair Foley Reagan Henry (Absent) George Hermanson David Hurst Reed Jarvi Robert Mulhere Mario Valle Fiala ~J Hiller Henning __ Coyle .. v' Coletta 1ft' .; ALSO PRESENT: Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator, GMD Planning & Regulation Judy Puig, Operations Analyst - Staff Liaison Jamie French, Director - Operations & Regulatory Management Jay Ahmad, P.E., Director - Transportation Engineering Ed Riley, Fire Code Official- Fire Code Office Nathan Beals, Project Manager - Public Utilities Kenneth Rech, P.E., Director - Environmental Health/Engineering Claudine Auclair, Manager - Business Center Amy Patterson, Impact Fee and Economic Development Manager MISC. Corres: Date: C\ \\"b\ \ \ Item #: \ u:X: -:2.. ~ \0 June 1,2011 I. Call to Order: Chairman William Varian called the meeting to order at 3 :00 PM and read the procedures to be observed during the meeting. II. Approval of A2enda: Change: . Blair Foley requested to revise the order of the Agenda to hear Item VII - A., "New Business," first. Marco Espinar moved to approve tile Agenda as amended. Second by George Hermanson. Carried unanimously, 12 - O. (Clay Brooker arrived at 3:04 PM) III. Approval of Minutes - May 4,2011 Meeting: Correction: . David Hurst was inadvertently marked as "excused." He did attend the meeting. Reed Jarvi moved to approve tile Minutes/or tile May 4,2011 meeting as amended. Second by Marco Espinar. Carried unanimously, 13 - O. IV. Public Speaker: (Melissa Ahern, CBIA - will be Ileard wilen Item is discussed.) VII. New Business: A. Report: State Audit of the Heath Department - Kenneth R. Rech, P.E., Director - Environmental Health and Engineering Blair Foley: . Subject: Septic system designs, inspections, and permitting procedures in Collier County . Report/evaluation is approximately 47 pages in length . Will ask for the topic to be included on next month's Agenda to enable Committee members to review the document with additional input from Staff Background information: . DEP Report was dated May 12,2011 . May 26, 2011 - Correspondence was sent to Septic Contractors and Site Evaluators concerning revisions to the checklist regarding how permits will be reviewed and inspections conducted. o The revisions were effective immediately. Mr. Foley suggested reviewing the changes in the same manner as changes to the Land Development Code, i.e., vet through the Utilities Subcommittee with input from Industry and Staff. 2 June 1,2011 Blair Foley noted new LDC Amendments are specific concerning the effective date. He expressed concern for permits in the "queue" and clients who are trying to update their septic systems but could not make adjustments because they did not receive proper notification. Kenneth Rech: . Collier County's Health Department is part ofthe Florida Department of Health . The audit of the County's programs was conducted in November, 2010 . Some changes have been put into place . Copies of the Memorandum dated May 26th outlining a number of changes and the checklist entitled "Onsite Sewage Treatment Disposal System Repair - Residential" were distributed to the Committee. Chairman Varian noted the Contractors were caught "off guard" by the audit and the required changes. Mr. Foley stated the Report noted a follow-up report is to be submitted in six months (from the date of issuance) detailing the Health Department's progress. He asked if this indicated that the Industry had time to phase in the changes. Dalas Disney requested an overview of the revisions and why the changes were required. Mr. Rech stated the primary cause was a change in interpretation by the auditor for the State's Department of Health. He noted audits of the County's programs are conducted every three years and the November audit was conducted by a different auditor. He further stated there were marked changes in interpretation on a number of items. Reference was made to the Memorandum, i.e., Site evaluations must utilize specific scientific language to properly document the indicator that identifies the Seasonal High Water Table ("SHWT"). Twenty-four specific points were outlined in the Memorandum. Discussion ensued concerning the F AC 64E-6 requirements and how to satisfy them. It was noted physical permits going back to the early' 80s are available. Additional documentation is available in various log books. Time line: . April 18: County received a draft of the initial audit · May 19: County submitted a Corrective Action Plan based on the draft · May 20: County received the final version of the draft which had been revised by the State on May 12th but not forwarded to the County · May 24: State sent an email accepting the County's Corrective Action Plan Mr. Rech has requested a meeting with representatives from the State's Program Office to discuss the Audit to determine the best methods to achieve compliance. George Hermanson cautioned there is very little flexibility or room for negotiation when dealing with the State, and further stated there is limited opportunity for input. 3 June 1,2011 It was noted the last audit took place in 2007 and only four corrections ("findings") were necessary. It is possible to apply to the State for a variance. A question was asked if there was an appeal process with the State since it appeared the problem was Auditor's interpretation. . Example: the Auditor was in the field with Staff and stated he did not agree with the "Wet Season Water Table" on a particular job, but he did not provide documentation. Comment: "Is there a standard for interpretation or is it just a 'moving target'? It seems to be arbitrary and capricious." Melissa Ahern, CBIA, stated a concern of the Industry was in regard to the requirements being enforced that were not codified. She requested the FAC or other Code for each requirement being implemented. Mr. Rech replied some of the policies were twenty years old, but they were not put into a Code. It was noted the Health Department is not permitted to interpret the Code but can only follow the interpretations provided by the Program Office. The Permitting Process was explained, including the option to apply for a variance. There was a discussion concerning enforcement of the Code by the Health Department, including Permits by Affidavit. The Health Department has Citation authority, with fines up to $500 per day. Chairman Varian asked to be notified if a meeting is scheduled with the State, and if the State Representative could appear before DSAC. V. Growth Mana2ement Division - Staff AnnouncementslUpdates: A. Public Utilities Division: Nathan Beals, Project Manager - Public Utilities . Jim Delony, the Administrator for Public Utilities, resigned on May 27,2011 and an Interim Administrator, Dr. George Yilmaz, has been appointed. . Joe Thomas resigned in December; a new Water Distribution Manager will start work in July. . The Discussion Group met on May 17th and the "Approved Product List" was revised to add more options for meters B. Fire Review: Ed Riley, Fire Code Official- Fire Code Office . Monthly Activity Report for April was submitted. o Reviews conducted: 686 (less than in March) . The move to the new building has been delayed for approximately two weeks due to IT problems. C. Transportation Planning Division: Jay Ahmad, P.E., Director - Transportation Engineering . The Oil Well Road project is approximately 55% complete. o A multi-use asphalt pathway has been installed. 4 June 1,2011 · Bids for the Davis/Collier Project were opened; there is a protest due to underbidding of some segments. The Purchasing Department is investigating. A question was asked concerning the speed limit on Vanderbilt Drive, south of Wiggins Pass Road. Mr. Ahmad stated the limit is 35. (Blair Foley left at 4:00 PM) D. Planning and Regulation: Jamie French, Director - Operations & Regulatory Management . "CityView" - more issues were discovered and it is still not online o The IVR ("Interactive Voice Recognition") was not functioning properly and is currently undergoing testing o Check validation had stopped working . A search engine has been created to allow access to flood elevation certificates for properties . Re: refund of Land Development Fees for Inspections and Plan Reviews: o After review of data, it as determined that one percent has been held back for Staff time, i.e., $250 for administrative fees of $25,000 Chairman Varian requested that Michael Ossorio and Jim Turner attend the next DSAC meeting to explain Licensing's time line to obtain a permit after a "Cease and Desist" has been issued. VI. Old Business: A. Reconsideration of Previous RPZ Motion (April 6, 2011) - David Dunnavant B. Review and Approval of Letter to BCC regarding DSAC Recommendation David Dunnavant, as the motion maker, moved to witlldraw tile motion made and passed during tile April 6, 2011 meeting. Second by David Hurst. David Dunnavant provided a brief review: · The Subcommittee reviewed the RPZ requirement on fire systems. · Resolution #2009-224 was passed in 2009 on a Consent Agenda without Industry input. · The Subcommittee determined that it did not understand the necessity for implementation of RPZs on fire systems since the incremental safety benefit does not match the cost to the Industry. · The existing Double Detector Check Valve assembly system has worked for years without an inherent risk to the safety, health and welfare of the citizens of Collier County. · Recommendation: Request that the BCC remove the stay currently in place on that portion of the Resolution to enforce the Ordinance, which eliminates the Double Detector Check Valve assembly, and to reinstate the DDCs as a suitable backflow device on fire systems. 5 June 1,2011 He noted the text of the Motion was included on Page 4 of the May 4th Minutes. George Hermanson stated he would abstain from voting due to a conflict of interest. Motion carried, 11- "Yes''ll- "Abstention" (by George Hermanson). Chairman Varian noted a copy of the formal letter to the Board of County Commissioners had been distributed to the Members. David Dunnavant stated the letter contained the entire recommendation, as follows: ''After extensive review of tile issue and materials, DSAC Ilas determined tllat tile current Double Detector CIleck assembly system is not inllerently dangerous to County's public water system users. It is tile backjlow protection device standard for fire systems nationwide of tile American Water Works Association (AWWA). Altllougll tile safety of tile water system would be enllanced by tile installation of RPZs, the significant costs versus tile nominal benefit of sucll enllancement does not warrant implementation and tile additional expense to our County's citizens. Additionally, implementation of RPZs would create an increased friction loss to tile system in comparison to tile Double Detector CIleck assembly and will alter fire sprinkler design in tile future for buildings that require tllis new backjlow device, adding fire pumps at many locations. Furtller, implementation of RPZs to future projects provides no additional safety to tile system as it is currently built out and to its current users. Tile possibility of tile Utilities Division seeking RPZ assemblies in tile future on existing buildings, witll its Iligller friction loss, would render many existingfire protection systems inadequate, forcing significant expense on tile citizens wllo own tllese buildings and also adding numerous mecllanical fire pumps tllat our Fire Departments would Ilave to rely on in figllting fires. Last, tile requirement in tile Utilities Standards Manual tllat classifies a Ilydrant or FDC as a downstream connection tllat would require an RPZ assembly, instead of a Double Detector CIleck, is an unnecessary cost increase to our County. Tile Double Detector backjlow device provides greater protection tllan tile typical Ilydrant installation on our County water system. DSAC'sfinal recommendation is tllat tile Board of County Commissioners repeal tile portion of Resolution #2009-224 wllicll implements RPZs as tile only accepted backjlow prevention device on fire systems, and return to tile original Double Detector CIleck Assembly Valve system tllat Ilas effectively been in place for years. And also requests tllat the Public Utilities Division modify tile Utilities Standard Manual in Ordinance 2004-31 to allow tile use of Double Detector CIleck Valve assemblies on fire systems when tile only downstream connection is a fire Ilydrant or a fire department connection. Tile Motion was carried by unanimous vote witll (1) Abstention of tile Development Service Advisory Committee." (Note: The changes made on Page 7 have been incorporated above.) 6 June 1,2011 David Dunnavant moved to approve DSAC's final recommendation to tile Board of County Commissioners tllat tile Board repeal tile portion of Resolution #2009-224 wllicll implements RPZs as tile only accepted backjlow prevention device on fire systems, and return to tile original Double Detector CIleck Assembly Valve system t/tat Ilas effectively been in place for years. And also, request tllat tile Public Utilities Division modifY tile Utilities Standard Manual in Ordinance 2004-31 to allow tile use of Double Detector CIleck Valve Assemblies on fire systems wilen tile only downstream connection is a fire Ilydrant or a fire department connection. Second by Dalas Disney. Judy Puig will send the Conflict of Interest form to George Hermanson for signature. Discussion: David Hurst questioned Nathan Beals concerning the prior requirement for down- stream connections. Nathan Beals replied since 1997, the Standards have stated if there is a dedicated fire line with connections downstream, an RPZ is required. He defined "connections downstream" as hydrants, etc. David Hurst stated he thought the motion was to return the Ordinance to what was in place in 2008. David Dunnavant noted there are hydrants throughout the County that do not have any backflow prevention devices on them. He stated if Double Detector Checks are installed on hydrants, that provide more protection than is currently in place. He continued that part ofthe Subcommittee's discussion was that there was no logic to installing RPZs if it involved only a Fire Department connection or a hydrant downstream. Motion carried, 11- "Yes"/ 1- "Abstention" (by George Hermanson). The letter was reviewed and the following changes were made: . First Paragraph: Change "added costs" to "significant costs" . Second Paragraph: remove apostrophe from RPZs . Second Paragraph: (last line) add "to" between "and" - "its" . Second Page (continuation of previous paragraph); add "the Utilities Division" prior to "seeking" and change "a" to "an" . Third Paragraph: change Resolution 2009-22 to 2009-224 · Third Paragraph: (last line) add "or a Fire Department connection." to the end of the sentence. . Fourth Paragraph: add "with one abstention" to the end ofthe sentence. · Signature Line: Remove slash (I) between RPZ and Utilities under title for David Dunnavant David Hurst moved to approve tile letter as revised. Second by Mario Valle. Motion carried, 11- "Yes''ll- "Abstention" (by George Hermanson). 7 June 1,2011 c. Update: School Board Impact Fee Subcommittee - Amy Patterson, Impact Fee and Economic Development Manager . A copy of the Executive Summary dated October 12,2010 was distributed to the Committee. The Executive Summary recommended reducing Impact Fees by 50% with a retroactive effective date of October 8, 2010. . The Subcommittee met on April 8th . A copy of the draft of the School Impact Fee Update Study prepared by Tindale-Oliver, dated March 31,2011, was distributed to the DSAC members. . There were changes to credit calculations, land values (declined), and construction costs from the 2006 Study. Reed Jarvi asked what will happen to the reduced rates at the end of the recommended two-year period. Amy Patterson replied that the Board has several options: . To keep the 50% rates in effect, or . To bring to the Study Rates into effect. She noted by October, 2012, it will be time to conduct are-study. It was noted the School Board does not have any reserves in its Impact Fee fund. There was a discussion of land values for future school sites and how the figures were determined. Reed Jarvi considered the explanation by Tindale-Oliver to be inadequate and too high. Mario Valle referred to Table B-3 and noted land values for parcels owned by the School District in the eastern portions of the County have decreased according to the Assessed values in the Property Appraiser's Office. He stated land values in the Estates have dropped by approximately 90%. Mario Valle moved to approve accepting tile Scllool Impact Fee Impact Study and to recommend approval to tile Board of County Commissioners. Second by Robert Mulllere. Motion carried, 11 - "Yes''ll - "absent." (Note: George Hermanson briefly left the conference room during the discussion and did not return until after the vote was taken.) D. Project Request Application Questionnaire - Nick Casalanguida, Deputy Administrator, GMD Planning & Regulation, and Claudine Auclair, Manager- Business Center . A copy of the draft of the Project Screening Questionnaire was distributed to the members. . The Questionnaire has been reduced by several pages. . An Insubstantial Change can be submitted at the same time as a Building Permit application. . Two separate fees will still be charged. . Claudine Auclair asked for volunteers to serve on a Subcommittee to review potential changes to the Land Development Code (by Amendment) and the Administrative Code. 8 June 1,2011 · Reed Jarvi, Robert Mulhere, David Hurst, and Marco Espinar volunteered to serve on the Subcommittee. VIII. Committee Member Comments: . David Hurst noted his comments on Page 8 of the May 4th minutes were not what he intended to state. He requested to change the word "circumference" to "area," and to remove "it is dug 2 to 3 inches deeper" and insert "but it may be allowed to stage at approximately two to three inches higher." Next Meetin2 Dates: (Meetings will commence at 3:00 PM unless noted below.) July 6, 2011 August 3,2011 September 7, 2011 October 5, 2011 November 2,2011 December 7, 2011 There being no further business for the good of the County, the meeting was adjourned by order of the Chairman at 5:00 PM. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE ~ William Varian, Chairman The Minutes were a roved by the Board/Committee on "as submitted" OR "as amended" U. ~\J[ (p ,2011, 9 yI FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR COUNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER lOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS LAST NAME-FIRST NAME-MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE Hermanson, George Harvey DSAC MAILING ADDRESS THE BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON 2800 NORTH HORSESHOE DRIVE WHICH I SERVE IS A UNIT OF: CITY COUNTY D CITY XXJCOUNTY D OTHER LOCAL AGENCY NAPLES COUNTY NAME OF POLITICAL SUBDIVISION: N/A DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED MY POSITION IS: JUNE 1, 2 0 11 D ELECTIVE XXiji APPOINTIVE WHO MUST FILE FORM 88 This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board, council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. Your responsibilities under the law when faced with voting on a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending on whether you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before completing the reverse side and filing the form. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 112.3143, FLORIDA STATUTES A person holding elective or appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures to his or her special private gain or loss. Each elected or appointed local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a mea- sure which inures to the special gain or loss of a principal (other than a government agency) by whom he or she is retained (including the parent organization or subsidiary of a corporate principal by which he or she is retained); to the special private gain or loss of a relative; or to the special private gain or loss of a business associate. Commissioners of community redevelopment agencies under Sec. 163.356 or 163.357, F.S., and officers of independent special tax districts elected on a one-acre, one-vote basis are not prohibited from voting in that capacity. For purposes of this law, a "relative" includes only the officer's father, mother, son, daughter, husband, wife, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law. A "business associate" means any person or entity engaged in or carrying on a business enterprise with the officer as a partner, joint venturer, coowner of property, or corporate shareholder (where the shares of the corporation are not listed on any national or regional stock exchange). * * ELECTED OFFICERS: In addition to abstaining from voting in the situations described above, you must disclose the conflict: PRIOR TO THE VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on which you are abstaining from voting; and WITHIN 15 DAYS AFTER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording the min- utes of the meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes. * * * * APPOINTED OFFICERS: Although you must abstain from voting in the situations described above, you otherwise may participate in these matters. However, you must disclose the nature of the conflict before making any attempt to influence the decision, whether orally or in writing and whether made by you or at your direction. IF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR TO THE MEETING AT WHICH THE VOTE WILL BE TAKEN: . You must complete and file this form (before making any attempt to influence the decision) with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who will incorporate the form in the minutes. (Continued on other side) CE FORM 88 - EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 1 , AP*POINTED OFFICERS (continued) . A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency. . The form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. IF YOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION AT THE MEETING: . You must disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure before participating. . You must complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes of the meeting, who must incorporate the form in the minutes. A copy of the form must be provided immediately to the other members of the agency, and the form must be read publicly at the next meeting after the form is filed. DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST I, George H. Hermanson , hereby disclose that on June 1 ,20~: (a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) inured to my special private gain or loss; inured to the special gain or loss of my business associate, inured to the special gain or loss of my relative, x inured to the special gain or loss of Collier County Public Utilities Division whom I am retained; or , by inured to the special gain or loss of is the parent organization or subsidiary of a principal which has retained me. (b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my conflicting interest in the measure is as follows: 1. Repeal of Resolution No. 2009-224 which implements RPZs as the only accepted backflow prevention devices on fire systems and return to original double detector check valve assembly system. , which 2. Request that Public Utilities Division modify the utilities standard manual in Ordinance No. 2004-31 to allow the use of double detector check valve assembly system on fire systems when the only downstream connection is a fire hydrant or a fire department connection. June 8, 2011 Date Filed NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES ~112.317, A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING: IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY, REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENAL TV NOT TO EXCEED $10,000. CE FORM 88 - EFF. 1/2000 PAGE 2