FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION

WELCOME

Chairman Rodriguez welcomed the Commission, staff and the public to Melbourne for the February 2009 plenary session. He then stated the meeting was the Commission’s first meeting of 2009, and represented the initiation of the new six-meeting per year format. He further stated there would not be a split plenary session for the February meeting, providing additional time for key workgroup meetings. He stated the primary focus of February’s meeting was to initiate the repeal of several rules and to consider the adoption of the 2008 National Electric Code. He explained if anyone wished to address the Commission on any of the issues before the Commission they should sign-in on the appropriate sheet and as always, the Commission would provide an opportunity for public comment on each of the Commission’s substantive discussion topics. He concluded by stating public input was welcome, and should be offered before there is a formal motion on the floor.

REVIEW AND APPROVE AGENDA

Mr. Blair conducted a review of the meeting agenda as presented in each Commissioner’s files.

Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the meeting agenda as amended to reflect that rule repeal hearings would be held on February 4, 2009, consistent with Florida Administrative Weekly noticing. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

REVIEW AND APPROVE DECEMBER 9 & 10, 2008 MEETING MINUTES AND FACILITATOR’S SUMMARY REPORT

Chairman Rodriguez called for approval of the minutes and the facilitator’s reports from the October Commission meeting.

Commissioner Schock stated in the December minutes his name had been incorrectly spelled and his middle initial was an “R”.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the minutes as amended and the Facilitator’s Report as approved from the December Commission meeting. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

CHAIR’S DISCUSSION ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Chairman Rodriguez first announced the following appointments to the TACs and workgroups:

Energy TAC

Larry Maxwell was appointed to the Energy TAC.

Education POC

Ken Gregory was appointed to the Education POC.

Roofing TAC

Lorraine Alisio Ross was appointed to replace Buck Buchanan on the Roofing TAC.

2010 Florida Energy Code Workgroup

Rusty Carrol was appointed to the Energy Code Workgroup representing Broward BORA.

2010 Florida Accessibility Code Workgroup

Jon Hamrick was appointed to the Accessibility Code Workgroup to represent Florida Department of Education. Diana Ibarra was also appointed to the Accessibility Code Workgroup to represent ADA consultants. Shelley Siegel was appointed to the Accessibility Code Workgroup to represent interior designers.

Green and Energy Efficient Roofs Workgroup

Chairman Rodriguez stated at the December 2008 meeting the Commission agreed to convene a Green Roofs Workgroup to evaluate issues regarding green and energy efficient roofs in the Code. He then stated to date the following the appointments to the workgroup had been made: Chris Schulte, Craig Parrino, and Lorraine Alisio Ross.

Window Wall Workgroup

Jim Westphal and Jim Stropoli were appointed to the Window Wall Workgroup.

CO Detector Workgroup

Richard Roberts was appointed to the CO Detector Workgroup representing the CO Detectors Manufacturers’ Association.

Chairman Rodriguez then addressed the rule development initiatives. He stated there had been a Rule Development Workshop on the Cost Effectiveness Test. He then stated since the Commission completed adoption of the 2007 Florida Building Code and adoption of Glitch Amendments to the 2007 Code, the Commission could focus on the development of the 2010 Code Update process. He stated Section 109, HB 7153 directs the Commission to develop a rule for determining cost effectiveness of energy conservation measures to be considered

for inclusion in the Florida Building Code. He then stated the rule must be completed and applied to the update of the energy provisions of the 2010 Florida Building Code. He further stated the Commission would be working with stakeholders via the Energy Code Workgroup to develop cost effectiveness test criteria to be applied to justification for increased residential building energy efficiency requirements, and will conclude rule making in time for the adopted rule to be effective for inclusion in the 2010 Code Update. Chairman Rodriguez concluded by stating in order to complete this Legislative assignment as required the Commission needed to initiate rulemaking during the current plenary session.

Commissioner Browdy moved approval of initiating rule making to develop a rule for determining cost effectiveness of energy conservation measures to be considered for inclusion in the Florida Energy Code, by conducting a rule development workshop at the April 2009 Commission meeting. Commissioner Greiner entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Chairman Rodriguez reminded the Commission of the Rule Adoption Hearings on Rule 9B-72.090 (self-affirmation) and Rule 9B-72.180 (equivalency of standards). He requested the commissioners plan to participate in the Product Approval rule adoption hearings which would be conducted via telephone conferences on February 17, 2009, at 10:00 a.m. (Telephone number 888-808-6959, code 9221867).

Chairman Rodriguez then addressed the Annual Effectiveness Survey. He stated each year the Commission conducts an Effectiveness Assessment Survey to gauge the Commission’s perspective on a variety of issues. He further stated over the years the survey input has been the basis for many enhancements to the Commission’s procedures. He then directed the Commission to Mr. Blair for an overview of the survey.

Mr. Blair explained the process and requested that the Commissioners complete the on-line survey. He stated the results would be discussed at the April 2009 meeting. He then stated he would email Commissioners the survey link on Thursday, and requested that members take the few minutes required to complete the survey by Friday, February 27, 2009.

Chairman Rodriguez next addressed amending evaluation entities in law. He stated in response to the assignment regarding the recommendation to the 2009 Legislature on how evaluation entities should be recognized in law, at the December 2008 meeting the Commission voted to recommend eliminating entities no longer in existence, to include the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials Evaluation Service in the Law, and to alphabetize the list of approved evaluation entities. He then stated the text the Commission approved in the Report to the 2009 Legislature did not strike the now defunct “National Evaluation Service” from the list. He continued by stating in order to be consistent with the Commission intent, the text should be amended as follows:

The Commission recommends amending the list of evaluation entities in law as follows: (1) Include IAPMO Evaluation Service (ES) in the law as an approved evaluation entity. (2) Recommend changing the law to read as follows (update list to eliminate entities no longer in existence, add IAPMO ES, and alphabetize the list of approved evaluation entities): (a) Evaluation entities that meet the criteria for approval adopted by the commission by rule. He then stated the Commission shall specifically approve the ~~National Evaluation Service, the International Conference of Building Officials Evaluation Services~~, the International Code Council Evaluation Services, ~~the Building Officials and Code Administrators International Evaluation Services, the Southern Building Code Congress International Evaluation Services~~ the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials Evaluation Service, and the Miami-Dade County Building Code Compliance Office Product Control. Architects and engineers licensed in this state are also approved to conduct product evaluations as provided in subsection (5). Commission recommends…”

Commissioner Greiner moved approval to amend action previously taken. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the motion to amend the report to the Legislature, December Facilitator Report, and the December Minutes. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Chairman Rodriguez then stated a motion was needed to amend the Report to the 2009 Legislature and the December 2008 Facilitator’s Report and Meeting Minutes to revise the text regarding evaluation entities recognized in law to: eliminate entities no longer in existence, to include the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials Evaluation Service in the Law, and to alphabetize the list of approved entities.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the motion as stated. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Chairman Rodriguez then stated he had reviewed and approved the Report to the 2009 Legislature (as authorized by the Commission), and the report was now under review by DCA prior to submittal to the Governor and Legislature as required. He stated the Final Report would be posted to the Commission’s website and would be available for download once conveyed.

REVIEW AND UPDATE OF COMMISSION WORKPLAN

Mr. Dixon conducted a review of the updated Commission workplan. (See Updated Commission Workplan February 2009).

Mr. Dixon stated he would address only changes or additions to the workplan. He stated that under the Hurricane Protection Standards task the contract with the University of Florida has been extended to conduct testing on soffit systems. He then stated the appointed workgroup would both establish labeling requirements for soffit systems and at the request of the industry, look at performance criteria for soffit systems to be integrated into the 2010 edition of the Building Code. He further stated the workgroup meetings would be held February 4, April 9, and at the June Commission meeting.

Mr. Dixon then stated the Department of Community Affairs and FEMA requested the Commission reevaluate the policy regarding the inclusion of NFIP flood standards in the Code versus leaving those outside the Code and to local jurisdiction adoption. He stated the project was being funded by those two entities and would begin in March with meeting dates in March, April and May and with recommendations to the Commission targeted for the June or August meeting. He further stated it was anticipated the recommendations would be more of an administrative nature that go into statute rather than actual technical requirements that are placed in the Code. FEMA is satisfied with the standards in the International Building Code so there would probably not be very much discussion or changes to those technical standards.

Mr. Dixon stated that at the last Commission meeting the window industry asked that the policy considering labeling of windows be reviewed specifically as it would apply to storefronts and curtain walls of commercial building systems. He stated the project would begin in April and work would continue through the summer with proposals being submitted for the 2010 Code Development process by December of next year.

Mr. Dixon then stated the Legislature and Governor tasked the Commission with a number of initiatives for updating the energy standards for building construction in Florida. He stated the Commission had implemented the 15% increased efficiency requirement directive of the Governor, issued through his Executive Order for the 2007 Code. He then stated that during the last session the Legislature established a schedule for increased efficiency requirements going out through 2019. He further stated the immediate directive to be implemented by the 2010 Florida Building Code was an energy efficiency requirements increase by another 5%, for a total increased efficiency requirement of 20% effectively from the 2006 amendments to the Florida Energy Code. He then stated a workgroup was appointed work on the code changes and to develop a recommendation for a cost effectiveness test, required by the current statute, that has to be adopted by rule. He stated workgroup meetings were scheduled for February 3^rd and an additional two meetings in March before the April Commission meeting during which a rule workshop was to take place.

Mr. Dixon stated there were a couple of other tasks which fall under the Energy and Climate Change heading. He stated some were directives of statute and some were projects proposed by different TACs. He then stated the Legislature mandated the Commission evaluate technologies recognized in the Energy Code for achieving the increased efficiency requirement targets that have been set. He further stated, the Legislature also directed the Commission to evaluate and establish, together with standards already established in law, requirements for pools and spas and a list of technologies the Legislature stated had to be included in the code, including cool roofs. He stated a workgroup was appointed at the February 3^rd Commission meeting to work with the Energy workgroup to evaluate the green roof portion of the cool roof systems.

Mr. Dixon stated another project that came out of consideration of a late proposed amendment to the Energy Code during the glitch amendment process deals with looking into how requirements for upgrading air conditioning systems when an air conditioning unit is replaced.

Mr. Dixon stated high humidity problems in the hot and humid climate are an ongoing issue with competing effects on energy conservation and indoor air quality. The amount of fresh air brought into a building effects energy use and air quality. How the introduction of the fresh air is controlled is important to both. He stated the project would be ongoing throughout all Energy Code considerations as it moves forward.

Mr. Dixon stated a very large workgroup had been assembled made up of state agencies that have some regulatory role in licensing facilities that impact persons with disabilities, representatives of groups that represent persons with disabilities, the Commission’s Accessibility Technical Advisory Committee and the Accessibility Advisory Council to work on development of the next edition of Florida’s Accessibility Code. He then stated the law directs the Legislature, the Commission and agencies to take all steps necessary to maintain the federal certification of Florida’s Accessibility Code. He explained that meant when the federal government changes the base standards the Florida Code uses as the foundation for most of the Florida Accessibility Code, the Code had to be updated quickly. He then stated it was anticipated the Department of Justice would be completed with the next version of the Standards for Accessibility Design sometime in the summer.

Mr. Dixon then stated another project the Commission approved towards the close of the glitch amendment process was to form a workgroup that would look into how existing pools might be upgraded or how they are required to be upgraded through the codes to better address the entrapment problems and to match with the new federal guidelines on entrapment prevention.

Mr. Dixon reminded commissioners the approved updated workplan was always included as an attachment to the Facilitator’s Summary Report which is posted to the website one week after each Commission meeting.

Commissioner Greiner moved approval of the updated workplan. Commissioner Carson entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

CONSIDER ACCESSIBILITY WAIVER APPLICATIONS

Chairman Rodriguez directed the Commission to Jack Humburg for consideration of the Accessibility Waiver Applications.

Mr. Humburg presented the waiver applications for consideration. Recommended approvals were presented in consent agenda format with conditional approvals, deferrals and denials being considered individually.

#1 Trademark Cinemas

Mr. Humburg explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the council recommended approving the design for the larger theaters and deferring action on the smaller ones to permit the applicant to redesign the layout so no seats have sightlines greater than 30 degrees.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the council’s recommendation. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Commissioner Browdy stated typically there was a consent agenda with the particular items that had been approved without conditions by the Council. He asked Mr. Humburg if there were any approved without conditions and if so could he read those first so the Commission could deal with the consent agenda first and then take the other waiver applications individually.

Mr. Humburg stated all the waiver applications were approved with a couple having conditions.

Chairman Rodriguez stated the question was if he wanted to do the others without conditions with the consent agenda. He then stated since there was one waiver already presented the Commission should take action on it before continuing to the others.

Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Recommendation for Approval with No Conditions:

#2 Strike Industries

Mr. Humburg explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the council recommended granting the waiver as the applicant satisfied the condition that it would be disproportionate to the cost of the alteration to install the lift.

#Magic City Casino

Mr. Humburg explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the council recommended granting the waiver as it concluded it is unnecessary that all rows of seats be made accessible.

Commissioner Browdy moved approval of the council’s recommendation for approval of the consent agenda for items 2 and 3. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Recommendation for Approval with Conditions:

# 4 North General Plaza

Mr. Humburg explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the council recommended granting the waiver. All council members present had the implicit understanding that an elevator would eventually be installed, but this was not clearly stated in the motion. He offered a friendly amendment that the condition be an elevator would be installed as part of the construction of the second floor.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the council’s recommendation. Commissioner Greiner entered a second to the motion.

Commissioner Norkunas thanked Mr. Humburg and his council. He stated he felt it incumbent that he should make a couple of comments to his fellow Commissioners since all of the Commissioners represent stakeholder groups. He continued by stating the stakeholder group he represents is 17% of Florida’s 17 million population or 2.89 million people. He then stated he encouraged individuals with disabilities from around the state to go online to the website and read the waiver applications. He stated the Commission should keep in mind when a waiver is granted no further changes can be made to the waiver. He continued by stating changes could be made in rules but once the Commission grants a waiver it means for the next 20, 30 or 40 years folks with wheelchairs just cannot go there. He further stated anyone with two good legs can go there because they can go up the stairs. Commissioner Norkunas then stated after the Waiver Council makes its decision he sends it out in a mailing list he created to over three thousand people and organizations. He continued by stating he then wakes at 5 a.m. on the morning of each plenary session to read the responses. He stated some individuals with disabilities just cannot come to the Commission meetings. He explained he had encouraged those individuals to come, but they just cannot, some having attendants and so forth. He then stated he had received a lot of responses to this particular waiver application.

Commissioner Norkunas added if any of his fellow Commissioners were to open the application and look at ‘A’ they would see that what the applicant had done was build out the first floor of a building and are doing nothing with the second floor and in the application they wrote “declining market conditions dictate that it is an inappropriate time to complete the second floor as a tenant is not attainable so nothing is being done with the second floor.” He further stated the supplicant wrote “the cost of an elevator is $40,000.00,” adding if nothing was going on with the second floor and there was no tenant, the applicant should not have come for a waiver. He continued stating the consensus among individuals with disabilities in the state of Florida was all that has to be done to get a waiver and save the $40,000.00 was to get by the Waiver Council. He further stated he had cautioned and pleaded with his fellow Commissioners that they are an oversight committee who approves these waiver applications. He then stated he was discouraged they have even come up to do this. He stated again his thanks to the Waiver Council for catching it but asked his fellow Commissioners to do diligence for the people who were coming to the Commission for waivers for something they should not have come there for. Commissioner Norkunas concluded by stating if the Waiver Council had not found it there would have been a waiver from installing an elevator, then when a tenant was found for the second floor, installation of an elevator would not be required.

Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

#5 Green Monkey Yoga Studio

Mr. Humburg stated the application had been withdrawn by the applicant.

No action necessary.

#6 Bayfront Park

Mr. Humburg explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the council recommended approving the waiver, provided all wheelchair seating locations are not on the ends of the rows. They concluded it was unreasonable to require access to all rows in the performance venue.

Commissioner Carson moved approval of the council’s recommendation. Commissioner Kidwell entered a second to the motion.

Commissioner Browdy asked if there was a plan presented that showed accessible seating dispersed throughout or was the condition only that accessible seats be on the end rows.

Mr. Humburg stated accessible seating was dispersed at three levels but for the front row it was at the ends of the row. He stated the council recommended approval with the condition those seats at the end of the row be moved in one position.

Commissioner Browdy asked if there were also companion seats at the end of the row.

Mr. Humburg responded stating there were.

Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

# 7 Barnett Park Gynmasium

Mr. Humburg explained the petitioner’s request for waiver as it was described in each Commissioner’s files. He stated the council recommended deferring action on the request to allow the applicant to redesign the bleachers to integrate wheelchair seating to provide two locations with companion seats in each of the three bleacher sections. He then stated the applicant, as advised by council, had submitted a design just prior to the plenary session which provided integrated seating for 6 wheelchairs and companion seats which were integrated into the bleacher system. He stated the council recommended approval of the resubmitted design.

Commissioner Schock asked if the resubmitted design was approved by the entire council.

Mr. Humburg responded stating it was not. He then stated there had been a lengthy discussion with the applicant regarding the seating positions and it was submitted to him and staff just before the plenary session.

Mr. Bunton asked if the council had given specific direction to exactly what was needed.

Mr. Humburg stated yes.

Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Mr. Bunton asked Mr. Humburg if the waiver was being granted based on technical infeasibility.

Mr. Humburg stated that was correct.

CONSIDER APPLICATIONS FOR PRODUCT AND ENTITY APPROVAL

Chairman Rodriguez directed the Commission to Commissioner Carson for presentation of entity approvals.

Commissioner Carson stated there were no entities to be considered.

Mr. Blair added it was the first time ever that there were no entity approvals.

Mr. Blair stated there was a consent agenda for all those issues that were posted with the same result from all four compliance methods either for approval, conditional approval or deferral. He stated these were the ones without comment or there was no change to the recommendation as proposed presented. He stated if no Commissioner wished to pull any products for individual consideration he asked for a motion to approve the consent agenda for all four compliance methods for approval, conditional approval and deferral.

Commissioner Carson entered a motion to approve the consent agenda as amended for all four compliance methods for approvals, conditional approvals and deferrals. Commissioner Schulte entered a second to the motion. Vote to approve the motion was unanimous. Motion carried.

Mr. Blair presented the following products for consideration individually:

10849 Simpson Strong-Tie Co

Withdrawn

11449 Stanek Vinyl Windows

Withdrawn

11949 JELD-WEN

Mr. Blair stated the product was recommended for conditional approval with the condition to amend the NAMI certification to indicate the manufacturer of the door slabs and the corresponding Florida Product Approval Application Number for the door slab; indicate on the limits of use the utilization of the Right Concept door slabs on the assembly; new installation instructions to be provided.