Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Review Commission - Minutes - 04/27/2023Alan Cram, Chair Council Chambers Gabe Dunbar 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins Shaun Moscrip Eric Richards Mark Teplitsky Staff Liaison: Ronnie Zimmerman Marcus Coldiron Vacant Seat Chief Building Official Meeting Minutes April 27, 2023 A regular meeting of the Building Review Commission was held on Thursday, April 27, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. in person at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. •WELCOME BY COUNCILMEMBER PEEL •CALL TO ORDER Chair Cram called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. •ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cram, Dunbar, Moscrip, Teplitsky, and Zimmerman ABSENT: Richards STAFF: Coldiron, Manno, Hayes, Matsunaka, Ogul •PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. •DISCUSSION AGENDA 1.CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE MARCH 30, 2023 MEETING. Teplitsky moved to approve the minutes of the March 30, 2023 meeting. Dunbar seconded. The motion passed 5-0. Building Review Commission DocuSign Envelope ID: 4BFA32D9-37E8-46E8-8A47-447725972C96 2.RODNEY HENRICHSEN – SUSPENSION/REVOCATION DESCRIPTION: The purpose of this item is for the Building Review Commission to consider the Chief Building Official’s recommendation of revocation of the contractor license of Northern Colorado Plumbing and Drain (NCPD) with the City of Fort Collins. This item was first heard by the Commission on February 23, 2023. After presentation by the Chief Building Official and NCPD’s representative, the Commission decided to allow NCPD additional time to respond to the Chief Building Official’s recommendation of revocation. The Commission extended the initial 45-day suspension of NCPD’s license until the Commission’s next hearing date, which was March 30, 2023. STAFF: Marcus Coldiron, Chief Building Official Tim Goddard, counsel for the appellant, introduced himself. Rod Henrichsen, appellant, introduced himself. Staff Presentation Marcus Coldiron, Chief Building Official, stated this item relates to the Chief Building Official’s recommendation of revocation of the contractor license for Northern Colorado Plumbing and Drain (NCPD) with the City of Fort Collins. He outlined the documented history of violations and previous license revocations of the company, including an incident that occurred since the February 23rd hearing. He discussed the applicable Code section related to license revocation and stated the Chief Building Official is recommending Northern Colorado Plumbing and Drain’s contractor license be revoked for three main reasons, all of which relate to public safety. First, Northern Colorado Plumbing and Drain’s conduct, particularly at 2929 Ross Drive, demonstrates a deliberate disregard for the Building Code and for the safety of surrounding members of the community. Second, Northern Colorado Plumbing and Drain failed to comply with the lawful order to rectify the circumstances it had created, and third, Northern Colorado Plumbing and Drain was negligent in allowing these circumstances to manifest and, in failing to correct them when they did, the result was a threat to public health and safety. He also noted the company was engaging in plumbing work during the suspension of its license and stated staff is recommending revocation of the license for a minimum of one year prior to the company having the ability to seek its reissuance. Appellant Presentation Mr. Goddard stated the historical violations were not cited as violations at the time and NCPD was not notified of any issues with the permits and therefore did not have the opportunity to correct anything. He questioned the fairness of going back in time to seek that information. Additionally, he expressed concern about text messages between a disgruntled employee of NCPD and City personnel. He alleged there are no continuing violations and Mr. Henrichsen is working under other properly obtained permits of other licensed contractors. He questioned the impartiality of the City employee. Mr. Henrichsen commented on the Ross Drive project and discussed the sequence of events regarding field inspection reports and permits. He also discussed the photos of the grade correction and noted it was made by digging it up. He denied allegations of working in the right-of-way without a permit and commented on firing his disgruntled employee. DocuSign Envelope ID: 4BFA32D9-37E8-46E8-8A47-447725972C96 Staff Rebuttal Coldiron discussed the work done at 2929 Ross Drive noting NCPD installed a new sewer stub into a City-owned manhole to fix the slope issue that was identified during the first inspection and did so without a right-of-way license. He also discussed previous license suspensions related to failure to pay for a permit. Regarding the older violations dating back to 2009, Mr. Coldiron noted they are related to expired permits for which field verification forms were never completed and therefore they are active and current violations. He also stated he made a site visit to 129 Frey Avenue and saw a NCPD employee on site assisting with the installation of the work. Appellant Rebuttal Mr. Goddard stated it is clear the older violations are all issues that arose under a prior administration and should have been dealt with at that time. He stated no allegations of poor workmanship have been made and stated work at 129 Frey Avenue was completed under a permit pulled by a licensed contractor. Mr. Henrichsen stated there were some employee shake-ups at his office but argued there was no mal intent. He discussed the disgruntled employee’s sabotage and stated he did not connect to a City manhole as it was on private property. Commission Questions and Discussion Teplitsky requested clarification from Coldiron regarding photos on pages 37, 47, and 48 of the packet. Coldiron replied page 37 is the trench that was dug at 2929 Ross Drive and the photo was taken by Damien Wilson when he visited the site after receiving a complaint from a resident. He stated the photos on pages 47 and 48 are at the 129 Frey Avenue property where work was completed after the first hearing regarding these issues and where NCPD employees were working for the duration of the project without a license. Teplitsky and Coldiron discussed the proper procedure per the Municipal Code to perform work under the license of another contractor. Moscrip requested clarification regarding whether a contractor can sub-contract a non-licensed individual to do work. Coldiron replied the individual would need to be employed by the contractor either by way of 1099 or directly. Moscrip asked about the timeline of the open trench at the Ross Drive project. Mr. Henrichsen provided his timeline. Moscrip requested clarification regarding the disgruntled employee who cut the pipe on purpose. Mr. Henrichsen replied that occurred in October or November of 2022. Moscrip asked about the timeline related to the 30-day notice to complete work on the violations for the 2022 projects. Coldiron replied he and Mr. Henrichsen met on December 22nd and the 30 days started at that point for Mr. Henrichsen to address the eight 2022 violations. He stated staff agreed to deal with the previous violations after progress had been made on those eight. Zimmerman requested clarification regarding how employees were paid for the Frey Avenue job. Mr. Henrichsen replied NCPD paid for his employee’s time on the Frey Avenue job. He stated all contractors work in the same manner. Zimmerman discussed the responsibility of holding a license and needing to be proactive. He stated it is clear the manner in which the employee was paid was a violation. Teplitsky requested information regarding the text conversation between Ben Knoll and the City employee. Mr. Henrichsen discussed firing the employee. Teplitsky asked about the status of the 2929 Ross Drive job. Mr. Henrichsen replied it has passed and approved all inspections. Dunbar asked if City staff ever indicated that working as a sub-contractor to another licensed contractor was an acceptable way to perform work at the Frey Avenue project. Coldiron replied Mr. Henrichsen specifically asked him if he could have other licensed contractors take over his jobs and he replied in the affirmative noting separate permits must be pulled and the licensed contractor must complete the work. He stated the question as to whether NCPD employees could work under another licensed plumber was never presented to him. DocuSign Envelope ID: 4BFA32D9-37E8-46E8-8A47-447725972C96 Mr. Henrichsen stated he just wants to follow protocol and stated he misunderstood the conversation with Coldiron. Dunbar asked Coldiron about previous open violations and whether the items listed on page ten are still open. Coldiron replied two of those eight have yet to be completed. Dunbar asked about the process related to past violations under a prior Chief Building Official. Coldiron replied the Ross Drive project issues led him to research other NCPD projects and he found over 80 violations related to expired permits which means they are active building violations that need to be remedied. He stated the violations do not go away when a new Chief Building Official is hired. Teplitsky asked Carissa Soderlind about her conversation with Coldiron and whether it was her understanding that NCPD employees could work on the Frey Avenue job despite their license being suspended because Covenant Plumbing had pulled the permit. Ms. Soderlind replied that was her understanding at the time, but she now understands it is a violation. Dunbar requested additional information from Ms. Soderlind. Ms. Soderlind replied she was told by Damien Wilson the Crestmore and Whedbee projects could be resolved with a camera inspection, which she submitted. Moscrip asked staff if they have received those emails. Mr. Damien Wilson replied in the affirmative, but noted they were received three weeks after the 30-day deadline. He stated he cannot update the status of the projects as long as the license is suspended. Zimmerman stated there are a couple of foundational issues, one is the responsibility of the license holder to take care of matters and not relying on others to tell him he is not in compliance. He stated he sees a lack of understanding of responsibilities and poor communication by NCPD. He also stated the Frey Avenue job was a clear violation. He questioned whether license revocation is appropriate to ensure future safety and well-being of the community. Moscrip discussed subcontractor payment and suggested the City could resolve computer issues to allow the camera inspections to be entered thereby resolving issues with certain projects. Chair Cram discussed his observations related to Mr. Henrichsen’s attitude and stated he believes license revocation is appropriate. He stated he believes the City has met the burden of proof under the Code provision. Dunbar asked if an Executive Session would be prudent. Chris Hayes, Assistant City Attorney, outlined the process and procedure for moving into an Executive Session noting it cannot substitute for an open deliberation of the matter. Teplitsky noted the Commission takes all matters related to licensing seriously and no members are attempting to jump to revocation quickly. However, he stated he agrees with Chair Cram noting issues have been ongoing and it is unfair to City staff and the public. He stated he has not seen any evidence that issues will stop. Moscrip noted NCPD will not have the opportunity to correct past violations if its license is revoked. Chair Cram noted the revocation does create somewhat of a hardship; however, NCPD does perform work in other cities and the revocation will only be for one year. He stated it is important for contractors to understand the Code must be followed. Zimmerman asked if a license revocation would start from the original date of suspension in January, or another date. Hayes replied the license would be revoked as of the day the decision was made, not retroactive to the date of suspension as that is different from license revocation. Motion Chair Cram made a motion that the Building Review Commission is choosing to revoke the contractor’s license for Northern Colorado Plumbing and Drain as staff has met its burden of showing violation of City Code Section 15-162(D). Factors cited by the staff include knowing and deliberate disregard of the Building Code, failure to comply with a lawful order of the Building Official, commitment of acts of negligence, incompetence, or misconduct. License revocation would further the intent of the Code of establishing and reasonably administering minimum qualifications and conduct standards for contractors. Zimmerman seconded. The motion passed 5-0. DocuSign Envelope ID: 4BFA32D9-37E8-46E8-8A47-447725972C96 Chair Cram noted Mr. Henrichsen has the right to appeal this decision to City Council. Hayes clarified the one-year revocation period was not mentioned in the motion and was a recommendation of staff. He noted the contractor has the right to apply for a new license at any time after revocation and stated the Commission could offer a recommendation as to when it believes it would be appropriate for the licensee to reapply, but it may not mandate when such an application could be received by the City. Chair Cram made an informal recommendation that Mr. Henrichsen wait one year before reapplying for a new license. It was clarified that the Building Department could consider an application for a license at any time, and if denied, the applicant could come before the Commission with an appeal. •OTHER BUSINESS Chair Cram noted Board recruitment is open until the end of April and stated one application has been received for the Commission at this point. •ADJOURNMENT Chair Cram adjourned the meeting at 10:29 a.m. Minutes prepared by TriPoint Data and respectfully submitted by Melissa Matsunaka. Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on _________________________________ ______________________________ Marcus Coldiron, Chief Building Official Alan Cram, Chair June 29, 2023 DocuSign Envelope ID: 4BFA32D9-37E8-46E8-8A47-447725972C96