Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Review Board - Minutes - 01/28/2021Alan Cram, Chair Tim Johnson, Vice Chair Brad Massey Katharine Penning Eric Richards Justin Robinson Staff Liaison: Mark Teplitsky Rich Anderson Chief Building Official Meeting Minutes January 28, 2021 A regular meeting of the Building Review Board was held on Thursday, January 28, 2021, at 9:00 a.m. The meeting was conducted remotely via Zoom. x CALL TO ORDER Chair Cram called the meeting to order at 9:09 a.m. x ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cram, Johnson, Massey, Richards, Robinson, Teplitsky ABSENT: Penning STAFF: Anderson, Manno, Havelda, Schiager, Coldiron x PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA No members of the public were present. x DISCUSSION AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 29, 2020 MEETING. Mr. Teplitsky moved to approve the minutes of the October 29, 2020 meeting. Mr. Johnson seconded. The motion passed 6-0. x INTRODUCTION OF NEW LEAD INSPECTOR Mr. Anderson introduced Marcus Coldiron who has replaced Sam Hancock after his retirement. Mr. Coldiron talked briefly about his experience and his responsibilities as Lead Inspector. Mr. Anderson added that Mr. Coldiron will be overseeing the rental program. Mr. Coldiron described what that program entails in terms of addressing tenant safety concerns throughout the City. Building Review Board 2. UPDATES AND CHANGES TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 15 ARTICLE V CONTRACTOR LICENSING DESCRIPTION: CBO Rich Anderson is seeking the Board’s support of the proposed process and timeline for updating the contractor licensing code. Staff Report Mr. Anderson reviewed the staff report as presented in the agenda packet. Board Questions and Discussion Chair Cram commented on the value of updating this Code and aligning the licensing requirements of the neighboring municipalities. Ms. Manno stated she had been in communication with the Loveland and Larimer County licensing administrators and talked briefly about some differences in requirements, and the possibility of simplifying the Fort Collins license structure. Mr. Johnson commented that as a contractor, managing the various licenses has become complex, so he is in favor of aligning with the other jurisdictions. Mr. Anderson explained that this alignment would make it easier for contractors licensed with Loveland or the County to get licensed in Fort Collins without project verifications. He also stated that stricter requirements and a special license are being considered for landscape irrigation to address issues with water conservation. He also talked about the possibility of using national certifications instead of project verifications for medical gas licenses. [Secretary’s note: Chair Cram experienced an internet outage. The Board paused discussion from 9:33 to 9:36 at which time Chair Cram rejoined the meeting via speaker phone.] Board Deliberation Mr. Johnson moved that the Building Review Board approve the code adoption process and timeline as discussed. Mr. Teplitsky seconded. The motion passed 6-0. 3. CONTRACTOR MENTORSHIP PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The City of Fort Collins Building Services Division is seeking approval to implement a Contractor Mentorship program. Staff Report Mr. Anderson reviewed the staff report as presented in the agenda packet. Board Questions and Discussion Mr. Teplitsky asked what types of licenses would be included in this program. Mr. Anderson explained how the program would work and Ms. Manno added that this would help a contractor gain a higher- level license at a later date. Mr. Richards asked whether the contractor seeking the mentorship is responsible for recruiting their own mentor or if Building Services would be responsible for making that match. Mr. Anderson explained that any contractor who has the necessary license could act as a mentor, and the “mentee” would be responsible for finding one. Mr. Teplitsky asked how the program would be tracked. Mr. Anderson talked about how the record- keeping might work. Mr. Massey pointed out that the mentorship agreement stated the builder agrees to be the acting general contractor on the project, but Mr. Anderson had said the mentor would be the general contractor. Mr. Anderson explained that the details of the program would be developed once the Board approves the concept. He offered to return to the Board with a more defined program at another meeting. Mr. Johnson stated while the agreement may need modification, this program would enable the CBO to allow mentorship agreements without having to bring them to the Board. Mr. Teplitsky asked about the relationship between the mentorship program and the 30-day temporary license the CBO is authorized to issue. Mr. Johnson said that if a contractor does not meet the licensing requirements within that 30-day period, they would not be able to continue to do work at that license level, whereas the mentorship program would help a builder gain the project experience to later meet the requirements for that higher license. Mr. Anderson stated that another option would be to amend Chapter 15, Article V, Section 15-157(e). Chair Cram said he would like to see more details and give the Board members a chance to offer suggestions. He expressed concerns about the potential length of a project under a mentorship. Mr. Anderson summarized what he had heard from the Board, stating the following: x Provide the form in its final format. x Include some hard timelines within the mentorship program. x Develop clearly defined policies and procedures for how the program would be managed. x Bring the item back to the Board for reconsideration. Chair Cram agreed with Mr. Anderson’s summary. Mr. Teplitsky said he would be interested in exploring a policy that would allow the CBO to upgrade a builder’s license and complete a project. Ms. Havelda mentioned that the licensed contractor would need to be the one listed on the permit, rather than the builder. She recommended a simple policy and procedure manual, including limits on the timeline and project size. She said if those guidelines were followed, a Code change may not be necessary. Mr. Johnson clarified that the Board would still want to hear cases where a contractor wants to step up a license. He suggested allowing a temporary one-time approval for a mentorship to be approved by the CBO, but the extent of the gap between licenses in order to qualify should be specified. Mr. Anderson agreed that the policies and procedures would need to be spelled out but would prefer to leave it more general. He added that if the CBO denied a mentorship request, the builder could appeal to the Board. Mr. Teplitsky expressed concern about listing the licensed contractor on the permit but having another builder without the required license doing the work. Ms. Havelda clarified that the purpose of the form is for the homeowner to acknowledge the arrangement. She added it might be wise to reference the underlying contract in the mentorship agreement. Mr. Anderson said that the policies and the form should reflect that the agreement is between the owner, the mentee and the mentor. Ms. Havelda suggested that an acknowledgment of the mentorship agreement should be included in the underlying contract. Mr. Johnson wondered why the City would want to be involved in the contract. Ms. Havelda suggested that having all parties in agreement would protect the City from liability, but she would think about the appropriate wording. Mr. Johnson appreciated looking out for the owner and thought including the acknowledgment of all parties in the mentorship agreement would accomplish that. Ms. Havelda said the mentor’s insurance would need to cover them in this arrangement. Mr. Robinson asked who would hold the certificate of liability. Ms. Havelda suggested that the mentee could be added to the contractor’s policy as an additional insured. Mr. Teplisky said he trusts the Building Services staff to determine whether an exception should be made but wondered if it be simpler to create a set of rules for a minor exception to overcome the inefficiency of requiring individual Board approval, without involving the City in awkward scenarios that would not usually fall under the City’s responsibility. Mr. Anderson stated he would work on the following two items to bring back to the Board next month: 1) Define the mentorship program as discussed, and 2) Wordsmith changes to Section 15-157(e) of the Code which can be brought to Council if desired. Board Deliberation Mr. Teplitsky moved to table this item and discuss at a future meeting with further recommendations from Mr. Anderson and his staff. Mr. Robinson seconded. The motion passed 6-0. 4. ADOPTION OF THE 2021 INTERNATIONAL FAMILY OF CODES DESCRIPTION: The City of Fort Collins makes efforts to adopt the most current version of Building Codes within 12 months of being published. This item is to discuss and determine the timeline for review and adoption. Staff Report Mr. Anderson reviewed the staff report as presented in the agenda packet. Board Questions and Discussion Mr. Robinson asked whether Wellington could be included in the agreement. Mr. Anderson said it was his understanding that Wellington, as well as Estes Park, Windsor and Timnath, had contracted with SAFEbuilt. Mr. Anderson stated he would like this to be a Northern Colorado effort, and SAFEbuilt was willing to come to the table. He also said he would be willing to share information with the smaller communities. Mr. Robinson liked the idea of including all of Northern Colorado. Mr. Richards stated that having some uniformity between different jurisdictions will bring great benefit to all the communities and parties involved. Mr. Teplitsky said continuity is important but added that the cost of construction should be considered in this process. He stated Fort Collins has added requirements that add cost to construction. Mr. Anderson noted that PFA is supporting this effort as there are similarities between building and fire code. He also talked about the integrity of buildings playing a role in disaster response and recovery. Board Deliberation Mr. Massey moved that the Building Review Board approve the code adoption process and timeline as discussed. Mr. Teplitsky seconded. The motion passed 6-0. x OTHER BUSINESS None x ADJOURNMENT Chair Cram adjourned the meeting at 10:25 a.m. Minutes respectfully submitted by Gretchen Schiager. Minutes approved by a vote of the Board on __________. _________________________________ Rich Anderson, Chief Building Official ______________________________ Alan Cram, Chair Rich Anderson Digitally signed by Rich Anderson Date: 2021.03.25 12:54:46 -06'00' 3/25/21