Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Review Board - Minutes - 04/27/20000 L A regular meeting of the Building Review Board was held on Thursday, April 27, 2000, in the Council Chambers of the Fort Collins Municipal Building, at 300 LaPorte Avenue, Ft. Collins. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Charles Fielder, Al Hauck, Susan Kreul-Froseth, Gene Little, and Brad Massey BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Rudy Hansch and Thomas Hartmann STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Felix Lee, Director of Building & Zoning • Delynn Coldiron, staff support to Board AGENDA: 1. ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Fielder and roll taken. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Board Member Kreul-Froseth made a motion to approve the Minutes. Board Member Hauck seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously and the Minutes from the March 30, 2000 meeting were approved as submitted. 3. CONTRACTOR HEARING — GREG BONHAM, D/B/A BROOKFIELD HOMES, INC.: Chairperson Fielder explained the procedures that would be used for the meeting. Felix Lee provided information relative to this appeal. He mentioned that the applicant had applied for a Class D 1 license and was requesting an exam waiver based on his 10 years of building experience. Lee referred Board Members to the information that had been supplied by the applicant regarding his experience. Applicant, Greg Bonham, addressed the Board. He stated that he had 10-11 years of homebuilding experience in the Ft. Collins area, and that during that time period he had built between 500 and 600 homes. Bonham mentioned that his role in these projects had been primarily as the owner of his company, Geneva Homes. According to Bonham, he BRB April 27, 2000 Page 2 opted to sell Geneva Homes approximately three years ago and then opened a smaller company, Brookfield Homes. Bonham stated that his company is building in Fossil Lake Ranch which is currently in the County. However, Bonham mentioned that he wanted to be proactive in obtaining a contractor license with the City in anticipation of this area becoming annexed into the City. Lee asked applicant to provide information regarding his role with Brookfield Homes. Bonham stated that he is presently working in the field providing site supervision, scheduling subcontractors, etc. He added that he has a partner that will be assuming the site supervision responsibility over the next several months and will also be pursuing all necessary licensing requirements. Lee asked applicant if he had taken any coursework relative to the current building code. Applicant stated that he had not taken formal classes, but felt that he had kept up with current codes through subcontractor interaction and through his membership with the Homebuilders Association. He stated that the Homebuilders Association does a great job informing contractors about new requirements and giving reminders about those things that contractors should keep abreast of. Lee asked applicant for clarification on his duties and responsibilities related to the projects that had been submitted in support of his license. Bonham stated that he was the contractor of record for all of the projects submitted and had obtained all of the required permits. Bonham added that over the past twelve months Brookfield Homes had completed eight houses and that the references provided were three of those eight homes. Lee asked for clarification on the Miller project. Applicant provided clarification. Lee stated that normally staff would follow up with the references listed to verify the facts and elaborate on any issues. Hauck asked applicant if he was asking for an exam waiver. Applicant confirmed this. Hauck asked for clarification on why the exam waiver was being requested. Bonham stated that it was due to the time factor involved in having to study and going through the actual exam process. Hauck asked applicant if he had ever taken an exam covering the building code. Applicant stated that he had not. Hauck asked for clarification on whether he had taken any coursework covering the code. Bonham stated that he had taken no formal coursework. Hauck asked applicant if he had taken any coursework related to construction management or construction methods. Bonham answered that he had not had formal coursework, but has, over the past 10 years or so, worked closely with others that have done a good job teaching him about the code. Bonham stated that Dave Anastasio was his original construction manager for Geneva Homes and was instrumental in the development of an approximately 200 page step by step procedure manual for constructing homes, which incorporated building code information, and is still used by his company today. BRB • April 27, 2000 Page 3 . Hauck asked for clarification on the hardship in this case. Applicant answered that he was not sure that there was necessarily a hardship, but was confident in the work that his companies had completed and felt that he had a level of construction experience that would allow a review board to grant him a waiver of the exam. Hauck asked for clarification on who at Geneva Homes was authorized to obtain permits. Bonham answered that several people, over the life of Geneva Homes, were authorized to do that, including David Anastasio, Charlie Atwood, Dennis Morgan, and Joe Beckett. He added that these individuals performed everything from construction management to on -site supervision work. Kreul-Froseth mentioned that the Board had, in the past, granted waivers of exams for applicants who had special training and/or education, i.e. a licensed architect, since they are required to take exams related to code issues. It was her recollection that these waivers had been granted primarily in those cases where some kind of specialized training had been completed and could be documented. Bonham mentioned that one of the reasons he came before the Board was because one of his former superintendents applied for a City license and was accepted based on his experience with Geneva Homes and was not required to take an exam. Fielder asked for clarification on the number of project forms that are required when an exam waiver is granted. Lee stated that there is a provision in the current ordinance that allows staff to waive an exam when five years of experience and five projects have been documented by an applicant. However, Lee mentioned that the Board is free to consider other factors. Fielder stated that it was his recollection that the precedent that had been set was to require the five projects. He asked applicant if he could obtain two additional project forms. Bonham stated that he had additional ones he could submit now. Little stated that he was familiar with applicant's work and that the quality of construction, the supervision and the project management he has seen have been exceptional. It was his opinion that this applicant was qualified for a license based on his level of on-the-job experience. Massey asked applicant for clarification on the amount of time he had actually spent out in the field. Bonham mentioned that while working at Geneva, most of his time was spent in the office as a manager supervising the site superintendents, creating systems and building procedures, etc. Initially, however, applicant stated that he was a framer and actually out on the job site. In addition, according to Bonham, over the past three years, the majority of his time has been spent in the field. Hauck asked for further clarification on the exam waiver language that exists in the current ordinance. Lee provided clarification. Hauck asked if the five projects had to be spread out over five years. Lee stated that the Board might want to consider that. Little made a motion to grant the requested exam waiver on the condition that two additional project forms be submitted so that applicant's contractor record would include five completed projects. Fielder added a friendly amendment to the motion that the BRB April 27, 2000 Page 4 projects submitted must be acceptable in terms of qualifications to City staff. Little accepted the amendment. Hauck seconded the motion. Hauck asked for clarification on whether or not it was Little's intent to have City staff follow up with all of the references that were provided. Little confirmed this. VOTE: Yeas: Little, Fielder, Hauck, Kreul-Froseth, Massey Nays: None The motion passed unanimously. 4. LICENSE HEARING — JONATHAN TSCHETTER, DB/A COLORADO CUSTOM HOMES, INC.: Lee summarized the specifics relative to this appeal. He mentioned that the applicant in this case was planning to apply for a Class E license and was requesting that the Board waive the exam requirement, due to the fact that he had taken and passed the Denver Class B exam, and waive the requirement that three individual Class E projects be submitted to support his license request due to his education, building experience and qualifications. Lee stated that the applicant currently holds a Class C2 license with the City which was issued in 1993. Lee added that the Denver exam which was completed and passed by the applicant was sufficient to meet the City's exam requirement. The issue in this case, according to Lee, was that the applicant was short one Class E project. Applicant, Jonathan Tschetter, addressed the Board. He stated that approximately three weeks ago he was asked to bid a tenant finish job in the City of Ft. Collins, at which time, he thought his Class C2 license would allow him to do the work. According to applicant, he submitted a bid, was awarded the job, and found out that his license was not adequate to cover the work. Tschetter mentioned that he ended up losing this job so there was not necessarily a hardship at this time; however, he anticipates having the opportunity to bid similar jobs in the future and wanted to move forward and obtain his Class E license now so he is not in this same position again. Applicant mentioned that he graduated from the University of Denver with a degree in construction management and had been involved in the construction industry for approximately 18 years. He added that during that time he has built over 500 homes, including multi -family construction. Tschetter stated that his multi -family projects have ranged from apartment complexes containing 200 units, to the current project he is working on in the City which contains 119 units. According to the applicant, some of the custom homes he has built have been in the $600,000 to $ 1 M dollar range, including homes done on behalf of Tradition Concepts for the 1990 Denver Parade of Homes. It was the applicant's opinion that the complexity and issues involved in some of these homes more than qualified him to do tenant finish work. BRB • • April 27, 2000 Page 5 • Tschetter stated that he had done work in Douglas County, the Town of Parker, Littleton, Denver, Arapahoe County, Golden, Lakewood and the Town of Silverthorne. He added that in any of these areas that required licensing he was able to take and pass the related exams. According to applicant, his only active licenses are for the City of Fort Collins and the City of Denver. Applicant mentioned that he understands the building code and knows how to find necessary information and apply it to his projects. He stated that building is a continual learning process and Tschetter was confident that the things he had learned would translate well into commercial construction. It was Tschetter's opinion that any of the City's building inspectors that he had had the opportunity to work with over the past few years would give him a more than satisfactory recommendation and would support his Class E license request. Tschetter closed by stating that he had not had much opportunity to bid and complete tenant finish jobs in the course of his career. However, based on his track record on the two tenant finish jobs that he has completed, Applicant felt that he had the necessary experience and ability to do this type of work. Lee asked applicant for clarification on the permit records for the Pro Sound Labs project. Tschetter answered that his wife had tried to obtain permit information through • the company in Denver but was unable to obtain the necessary records. He asked applicant if a permit had been obtained for the project. Tschetter confirmed this and stated that the permit had been obtained from Arapahoe County. Massey asked for clarification on the type of construction authorized by the City and County of Denver Class B license. Lee answered that this license is very similar to the City's Class B license. Hauck asked for clarification on the last exam that was taken by applicant which covered the building code. Applicant answered that he took an exam in 1993 with the City of Ft. Collins for his Class C2 license. Hauck asked for clarification on the exam that was taken in Denver and on what version of the building code it covered. Applicant stated that he took that test in April, 1996, but was unsure what version of the code it covered. Kreul-Froseth made a motion to support applicant's request based on the information that had been presented and the equivalency of the Denver exam. Fielder seconded the motion. Hauck mentioned that he was concerned about setting a precedent of authorizing a license without having the required amount of project experience. Kreul-Froseth stated that she was supportive of this request due to the additional education experience that had been cited — a B.A. in Business Administration with an emphasis in construction • management. She asked applicant for further clarification on his degree. Applicant provided clarification. BRB April 27, 2000 Page 6 Fielder stated that the Denver Class B license allows for tenant finish work and by providing applicant with a license, the City of Denver has acknowledged that he has experience that is equivalent to our Class E license. Fielder was in support of applicant's request. Lee clarified that the Denver Class B license acknowledges that applicant has experience that is equivalent to our Class B license. Massey asked if Lee had any concern that the test taken in 1996 covered a building code that was older than 1991. Lee stated that he was not concerned with this. It was his guess that the exam covered the 1991 or 1994 building code. VOTE: Yeas: Little, Fielder, Hauck, Kreul-Froseth, Massey Nays: None The motion passed unanimously. 5. OTHER BUSINESS: A. Update on Bob Campbell, representing Ceco Constructors: Fielder mentioned that Bob Campbell filed an appeal of the Board's decision regarding the framing licensing requirements with City Council based on the fact that the Board heard false or grossly misleading evidence. City Council unanimously upheld the Board's decision and found that the Board conducted a fair hearing. Fielder stated that he had planned on speaking during the time allowed for public input; however, he was advised by the City Attorney that once the Board hears a case Board Members are not authorized to speak to City Council unless Council requests this. Fielder mentioned that Lee can inform City Council that Board Members are in the audience in the event they would like added clarification, etc. Little stated that he wanted to comment on the reality of the effects of the framing regulations in Ft. Collins. As a Community, Little mentioned, we are trying to create reasonable housing costs. It was his opinion that this is almost impossible with today's material costs, labor costs and fees, to bring in a project that would be considered entry-level pricing for first-time renters or home buyers. Little added that one reality is that without using a labor force that is substantial enough to complete a project within budget and within the necessary time parameters (i.e., the proposed Campbell project where multiple buildings would be built simultaneously), it impacts whether the project will remain an affordable housing project. Little mentioned that in multi -phased projects that are being built along the Front Range where multiple buildings are being constructed in short timeframes, massive labor forces are being used to get the job done. He stated that he looked at the previous Campbell project and the timeline that it took to complete it, the budget that was required, and the resulting price to the public and compared that • BRB • • April 27, 2000 Page 7 . to his newly proposed project and there was a difference of nearly $3 '/z million dollars in cost that he would have to incur to construct the same product. According to Little, when that additional cost is amortized over the number of units, the price raises by nearly 15%. As much as we would like to use licensed contractors, Little stated, he sensed that the reality is that if we cannot bring in contractors who have massive work forces in order to be able to complete multi -faceted projects, we are not going to be able to have those structures built in Ft. Collins. Little added that those contractors do not have to bring their business here and the end result will probably be much higher multi -family housing costs. Little stated that there is a need to address this dilemma and thought it might be worthwhile to create some type of process that would allow large corporations to be able to come in and build these types of buildings with possibly unlicensed, but supervised, contractors, as has been done in the past. Hauck stated that he agreed with what had been said in terms of the economic realities and trying to get the projects done within specified timeframes, etc.; however, Campbell also had the option of hiring the workers as employees. It was Hauck's opinion that the underlying issue, especially in the framing trade, is that these large companies do not want to make their workers actual employees • and provide them the protection of worker's compensation, etc. Hauck mentioned that this would impact the pricing somewhat, but he was unsure of the extent of that impact. Little stated that the impact would be an approximate 30% increase to the cost of the construction. Fielder stated that the licensed framers that attended the Board hearing had talked to Campbell and they figured that the costs would be approximately 20% higher if they were used instead of the framer Campbell was proposing to use. Hauck commented that hiring licensed contractors would increase costs; however, there is still an option of hiring the workers as employees which may not increase costs as much. Hauck stated that the Board would not consider authorizing unlicensed electricians or plumbers to do work, but utilizing these licensed trades adds cost to projects. It was his opinion that once a decision is made to control a trade, either by licensing, direct supervision, direct employees, etc., then problems arise when exemptions are made as to when those controls apply. Kreul-Froseth stated that she, too, could understand the dilemma of rising construction costs; however, she stated that the licensing portion is only one small part of the rising costs. It was her opinion that there should not be different rules based on whether or not a contractor is local or from out of town, a large company • or small company, or based on the size of a project. She agreed that there are a lot of issues that should be looked at right now in an effort to reduce rising costs. BRB April 27, 2000 Page 8 Fielder stated that he is very sympathetic to the affordable housing issue. However, there was no one present at either the Board hearing, or the City Council meeting that spoke in favor of this issue. It was his opinion that the affordable housing issue might be a hardship. Hauck stated that he was in favor of affordable housing; however, he was not in favor of finding a way to create affordable housing at the risk of having unprotected workers that are not covered by worker's compensation, etc. Little mentioned that Campbell just finished an apartment complex under the same structure that we are denying him the opportunity to do on his proposed project, and yet the project went through the proper review and inspection processes and it turned out to be a quality project. Little stated that he is struggling because the outcome of the proposed project is a given based on his previous project which turned out to be a high quality apartment complex that was done within budget, within the specified timeframe, and provides reasonably priced living. Hauck reiterated the health and safety risks involved with having numerous independent contractors on a job site who are not covered by appropriate worker's compensation and other employment requirements. Little stated that another item that was brought up at the License Review Committee meeting was the fact that if Campbell decides to hire local framers to complete his project over the next year, it will make it difficult for other builders in town to find the necessary licensed framing contractors that they need for their projects. Hauck mentioned that Campbell is entitled to use the workers that he wants to by making them employees and carrying the necessary worker's compensation insurance, etc. Massey mentioned that allowing a project to be built without having contractors meet the current licensing requirements because there is an already existing project that was done differently under older licensing regulations, is like saying a new building does not have to meet current building codes because an identical one exists that was built under an older building code. There was some discussion that Campbell believed that a hardship existed in his case since his proposed project had been in the City's process for approximately three years, and the current framing licensing regulations were not effect at that time. Board Members discussed the fact that Campbell did not address this issue as a hardship. Little stated that Campbell has since mentioned that he should have based his case on hardships. There was brief discussion on whether Campbell would be able to bring his case before the Board again, based on hardships. Staff was unsure, but will follow up on this issue. BRB April 27, 2000 Page 9 B. Board Member Terms: Massey asked for clarification on the date of his term expiration based on the memo that was sent in packets. Staff mentioned that term expirations have be moved from June to December. Staff also mentioned that terms would not be automatically extended and that any Board Members who were eligible and interested in continuing on the Board would need to reapply. Hauck mentioned that he will be out of the country from January, 2001 through July, 2001. C. Update on Contractor Licensing Committee: Little mentioned that he was really impressed with the cooperation that has been shown by the members on the committee. It was his opinion that the input has been very constructive and has brought out the realities of the effectiveness of licensing and the things that are ultimately trying to be accomplished by licensing. Little stated that the end product will be significant and yet very fair to the licensed contractors. He added that there is accountability and yet also a sensitivity to applicants as they are moving through the licensing process. Lee mentioned that the open forum on the licensing process is scheduled for Wednesday, May 3, 2000, in the CIC room at 300 LaPorte Ave. Any interested Board Members were invited to attend. Meeting adjourned at 2:07 p.m. Felix Lee, Building & Zoning Director 0