DSAC Subcommittee Minutes 12/14/2012 December 14, 2012
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COLLIER COUNTY
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES ADVISORY COMMITTEE LAND
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE
FROMMIN
Naples, Florida, December 14, 2012 JAN 1 6 2013
BY: .........,
LET IT BE REMEMBERED, that the Collier County Development Services
Advisory Committee —Land Development Review Subcommittee in and for
the County of Collier, having conducted business herein, met on this date at
1:30 PM in REGULAR SESSION at the Growth Management Division
Building, Room 609/610 2800 N. Horseshoe Drive, Naples, FL with the
following persons present:
Robert Mulhere
Fiala —it David Dunnavant
Hiller
Henning —� Stan Chrzanowski
Coyle l_- Dalas Disney
.eotette Chris Mitchell
iJchr►La,_
ALSO PRESENT: Alison Bradford, Assistant County Engineer
Bill Lorenz, Director, Natural Resources
Caroline Cilek, Senior Planner
Christian Andrea, ALD
Jeremy Frantz, Conservancy of S.W. Florida
tem 4: KO I 23‘5
1 sto:
December 14, 2012
1. Call to Order:
The meeting was called to order 1:41 P.M. and a quorum established.
2. LDC Materials and DSAC Ordinance
Caroline Cilek provided a handout, which was also projected on an overhead screen,
containing the portion of the Land Development Code (LDC) concerning 6.05.00
Water Management Systems and Drainage Improvements Standards
She also provided a copy of a portion of the Code of Laws and Ordinances which
pertained to the creation, powers and duties of the Development Services Advisory
Committee.
The topic of discussion was a proposed revision and interim implementation
regarding LDC section 6.05.01 F Stormwater Retention/Detention Design for Single
Family Dwelling Units, Two Family Dwelling Units and Duplexes.
David Dunnavant moved to have Stan Chrzanowski chair the discussion. Second by
Dalas Disney. Carried unanimously. Stan accepted, noting he would have to leave
early.
To provide background information on the purpose for the Subcommittee, a draft
letter from the Chairman of DSAC, Bill Varian, to the BCC explained the cited
LDC Section which was creating an adverse hardship on certain property owners.
It requested an Out of Cycle Amendment to address the issue; and, to allow the
Committee to develop a proposed revision to Section 6.05.01 F.
Recommend an interim standard rather than an out of cycle LDC Amendment.
Realizing the urgency of addressing the problem, the suggestion was for a 2-part
process covering the next 2 months.
a) Propose to the Board, an interim measure/pilot project to see how it works,
while addressing any problems.
b) Work on it further during the LDC Cycle refining it as it goes through the
full LDC process. The Subcommittee was agreeable to the proposed
process.
3. Discussion of LDC section 6.05.01 F — Stormwater Retention/Detention Design
for Single-Family Dwelling Units, Two-Family Dwelling Units, and Duplexes
Stan Chrzanowski commented on the Table 6.05.01, stating the numbers in the
table should be raised and also that the 25%, implemented across the board, for
water quantity would be fair. He proposed less stringent measures to allow for
building on more than 2% or 3% of the property. He noted the Lot Coverage and
Impervious Surface Table were meant to be a water quantity solution to a problem
not water quality.
Justification for the 2,750 square feet and 4,850 square feet was arrived at by
looking at different areas of County, identifying approximate lot coverage, and
2
•
December 14, 2012
finding out 75 to 90% were under the lot coverage and impervious surface
requirement. He agreed the numbers now appear to be too low.
Dave Dunnavant suggested eliminating the fixed numbers in favor of a straight
percentage, citing the fixed number in the Table was creating the problem. He
stated most of impervious surfaces were driveways.
Stan Chrzanowski left at 1:50 p.m.
Caroline Cilek mentioned a stay of enforcement for Golden Gate Estates could be
an interim measure. Concern was the percentage suggested would allow for too
much impervious surface in the Estates.
Robert Mulhere noted there was no regulation in Golden Gate Estates for the
amount of impervious surface and very few districts have such a regulation. Also,
noted was newer homes were not so much a problem. Older, existing or remodeled
homes were the problem when the smaller lots build additions or bigger houses.
Without a Master Stormwater Management System, assurance was needed at the
permitting level as to how the water shed would be handled so as not to impact
neighbors. He agreed an interim standard would allow the DSAC LDR to prepare
language to put into the regular LDC Cycle as an amendment.
Dalas Disney stated the numbers in the Table could be doubled and still be less
percentage under the 11,000 square feet. He suggested an increase in the base
square feet or an increase in the excess area. Principal structure and impervious area
coverage could be done in combination. Or, leave the square foot allowables and
increase the percentage, adding a condition if on a body of water, no storage system
would be required and no runoff to neighbors would be allowed.
Chris Mitchell agreed, stating the Table, as shown, penalizes larger lot owners. He
suggested a reversal of the numbers. He favored removing the base of 2,750 square
feet and go with a straight percentage application to the size of the lot, taking into
consideration the width and setbacks. He noted the high cost of conforming to
retention/detention issues under the new FEMA determinations, especially with the
smaller lots.
Christian Andrea passed around several site plans of projects in the City of Naples
and County to show the impact of landscape and offered several points on how the
City of Naples handles stormwater runoff He spoke of the many conditions
involved with stormwater management runoff and ways not to encumber neighbors.
A lengthy discussion followed.
3
December 14, 2012
In summary, the points to be addressed were:
• The Table 6.05.01 —Figures should be addressed for smaller and larger lots.
• 25% lot coverage across the board should be considered.
• Older home additions, expansions, and rebuilding would demand the most
attention to drainage and stormwater retention/runoff vegetation, etc. which
may require engineer's report as determined in the permitting process.
• Assurances that neighbors would not be impacted by stormwater runoff.
• Impervious area in excess of a (to be determined) percent will require an
engineer's report identifying that neighbors would not be impacted.
• Adjustments could be considered where water can shed to a body of water.
• Write language to cover most situations and include some sort of exclusionary
or other designed"check list," as approved by the county engineer.
• Make criteria to manage stormwater.
• Separate item G. from item F. to clarify G. does not apply to F.
• Interim measure to enforce and control only what impacts neighbors. Then
return with a maximum outfall managed by berms, swales, curbs, and gutters
etc.
Dalas Disney left at 2:30 p.m.
4. LDC Amendment
The decision was made to have Alison, Caroline and Jack McKenna review all
comments, suggestions and proposals by the Subcommittee; work up a preliminary
interim standard which will improve and clarify the items put forth by the DSAC
LDR Subcommittee; and present it for review at the next Subcommittee meeting.
Chris Mitchell left at 2:40 p.m.
5. Next meeting date/time C
The next meeting was tentatively scheduled fir Januar 7 1 taff will notify
all participants upon confirmation. There being no rther business for the good of
the County, the Meeting was adjourned 2:50 P.M.
COLLIER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
ADVISO: •MMITTEE. LAND DEV OPMENT
REV I:COly EE/ i
//
:tan Chrzanowski, Chit an
These minutes were approved by the Board/Committee on 01n A)2O(3s presented,
or as amended .
4