Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommission On Disability - Minutes - 12/15/1997COMMISSION ON DISABILITY MEETING MINUTES December 15, 1997 1:00 pm Council Liaison: Michael Byrne Staff Liaison: Nancy Stirling Chairperson: Kathy Lassen Phone: (H) 204-0614 (W) 491-5930 Members Present: Members Absent: Mark Cummings Nancy Baker Mark Kramer Ray Sanderson Don Fish Laura Burnett Initha Stuckey Kathy Lassen City Staff Present: Felix Lee, Building & Zoning Sharon Getz, Building & Zoning Mike Gebo, Building & Zoning Nancy Stirling, COD Liaison Guests: Bob Campbell, CECO Jean Batchelder, Access by Design Stacey Abate Amy Rosenberg Alan Apt The meeting was called to order at 1:25 pm. NOTE: The Chairperson requested that meeting begin an hour earlier than the usual meeting time of 2:00 pm to allow enough time to complete the task at hand. I. Approval of November Meeting Minutes Chairperson Kathy Lassen asked if there were any changes or comments in regard to the November meeting minutes. There were none. Mark Kramer motioned to accept the minutes as they were written; Laura Burnett seconded the motion. The vote to accept the meeting minutes as they stood was unanimous. II. Announcements A. Laura Burnett has anew home address. Nancy will update the Member Address List and mail them to the COD members. Commission on Disability Meeting Minutes Page 1 December 15, 1997 B. Mark Cummings is still faithfully working on the COD video. He informed the Commission members that a script will be ready in January and that the COD should have a finished product in March. III. Human Rights Ordinance Chairperson Kathy Lassen received a memo from the City Manager asking that the Commission review the proposed Human Rights Ordinance and the proposed additions and changes to it. A response from the Commission is requested by January 9'". The Commission (quickly) reviewed the proposed HRO, reviewing both the addition of the sexual orientation wording and the items relating specifically to disabilities. There was some discussion of some items: • Section 13-16 Definitions: Jean Batchelder suggested possibly inserting the word "illegal" in front of the word "drugs." This is to acknowledge that there are times, for medicinal purposes, that persons may be prescribed drugs that are illegal for their condition. Section 13-17, c-4: The Commission felt that the criteria given were too vague. Needed to be made explicit and clear. Wanted a fuller definition for "reasonable accommodations" (perhaps as described by the ADA). Statements tend to make assumptions. To avoid this, need to define: "reasonable accommodations", "significant impact", "disqualify". The Chairperson suggested that the Commission do a blind vote — a sheet of paper was passed to around to each COD member to mark their vote on the following: a. Yes or No to the rewording of the HRO to add "sexual orientation" to the ordinance. b. Yes or No to approve HR's changes in regard to disability. Kathy and Nancy will review the results of this blind vote and thereupon send a response to the City Manager on behalf of the Commission [based on the outcome of the vote]. IV. Presentation by Felix Lee: Comparison of 1991 and 1997 Uniformed Building Codes Felix was asked by the Commission to attend this meeting and give the members an overview of the building codes. It was hoped that the information he provided would help educate the members on building codes and areas relating to accessibility specifically in order that they may understand the request of Mr. Bob Campbell who was presenting after Felix. Felix provided several handouts describing the standards of the 1991 and 1997 codes. The handout, "Basic Accessibility Comparison Table", as an overview, offered some helpful information in understanding differences. Some main points: ■ The 1991 UBC is based on the 1992 ANSI Standards and applies to all ground floor units, when there are four or more units. Commission on Disability Meeting Minutes Page 2 December 15, 1997 ■ The 1997 UBC closely follows the Fair Housing Act (FHA). There are two types of standards included in this: Type A which applies to a minimum of 2% of the total number of units on a site; Type B which applies to the remaining 98% of the project. ■ Type A units follow the ANSI standards. This is sometimes referred to as the "fully accessible" units and have stricter guidelines. ■ Type B units tend to follow the Fair Housing Act guidelines. ■ Areas where there may be differences between the two unit types relate to: interior door hardware; kitchen work surfaces; kitchen sink; kitchen appliances; kitchen storage; non - common laundry area; water closet location; bathroom mirror, medicine cabinet, dispenser; lavatory clearance, height, controls, pipes; bathtub/shower bars, controls, seat. ■ The 1997 UBC code is currently being reviewed by the Building Code Review group. It is expected that the code will be accepted and become the new building standard for the City of Fort Collins. V. Presentation by Bob Campbell, Developer with CECO Bob appears at this meeting at the request of the Commission on Disability due to a remand by the City Council to the Building Review Board. At a special meeting of the Building Review Board on November 25, 1997, members of the Commission present expressed their desire to hear Mr. Campbell's proposal at a formal meeting of the Commission on Disability so that they could have the opportunity to hear together the proposal and offer their recommendation as a group. The Building Review Board granted this request and agreed to hold off making their decision on whether to grant Mr. Campbell's project a variance or not after hearing a recommendation from the Commission on Disability. Mr. Campbell, in his presentation, offered the following information: ■ The 1991 UBC was the first year that accessibility criteria entered into the UBC. ■ There was the ADA but that was geared towards commercial buildings, not multi -family. ■ The Fair Housing Act is a Federal law. It is directed towards multi -family units and buildings. It was not part of the UBC requirements and was difficult (if it was ever) to enforce. ■ The 1994 and the 1997 UBC's combined both elements of the 1991 UBC and the FHA. These codes brought down the 100% of first floor unit requirement to the minimum 2% of total number of project units. Mr. Campbell's proposal is to build 5% (or 15 first floor units) the Type A requirements (ANSI standards), as outlined in the 1994 and 1997 building codes, versus the 100% requirement (which in Mr. Campbell's project would be 120 units) of the 1991 code which the City currently follows. After hearing Mr. Campbell's comments, the Commission members discussed this. Alan Apt asked Felix what other requests for variances have been made to the Building Review Board in the last several years. Felix gave the following: Commission on Disability Meeting Minutes Page 3 December 15, 1997 ■ In 1990, the developer of what is currently Ram's Village on West Elizabeth, sought a variance. There was a total of 138 units and they were requesting a variance to be allowed to build only 9 accessible units versus the State required 14% or 19 units. The BRB granted the variance which was then appealed. The Council returned it. (NOTE: this was prior to the adoption of even the 1991 code. The only requirements were the State law.) ■ In October 1994, after the City's adoption of the 1991 UBC, a project of 28 units requested a variance. The Building Review Board denied the request. (NOTE: after all this, the builder changed the configurations of their plans to tri-plexes, which are exempt from the building code.) Kathy Lassen spoke to Felix that she saw two different issues here: one of the Commission not being included in the first place, and two, this variance request. She stated that the Commission does want to be included in any future discussions of the Building Review Board concerning issues relating to accessibility and that it was unfair for the BRB members to exclude the Commission because, as they (BRB) stated at the November 25' meeting, in the past the Commission would not compromise. Kathy stated that her personal opinion was to say "yes" to Mr. Campbell's plans. She does, however, have some reservations towards the variance. The City's Code states specifically that variances can only be granted if there is a "hardship" identified by the developer/builder. Throughout all the discussions with the BRB, the Commission, and with the Building & Zoning department, there has never been any hardship defined. Some members of the Commission feel this is an important point to be considered in making this decision. Even if the COD gives a positive recommendation and the BRB again grants the variance, there is the possibility that a citizen or someone could appeal the variance and it would again go before the Council. There is some concern by some members that they would be, in essence, breaking their own law..... The Commission members agreed to go ahead and vote on the proposal. The following are the votes per member and their comments: Kathy Lassen: Yes. Although has reservations in regard to the "hardship" issue. Mark Kramer: No. Would be in favor of the proposal but feels the BRB has no legal basis to grant the variance. Alan Apt: No. Sees a procedural problem (by the BRB not including the COD) and feels that it is not the right time to be granting this variance. Initha Stuckey: No. Says it's difficult to predict the disabled population (in response to concerns of people making decisions based on assumptions); feels that if law says [100%], then it should stand. Does not support the proposal. Ray Sanderson: Yes. Although he has reservations, as well, concerning the issue of defining a "hardship" Amy Rosenberg: No. Mark Cummings: Yes. Stacey Abate: Yes. Laura Burnett: Yes. Also has reservations. Commission on Disability Meeting Minutes Page 4 December 15, 1997 Nancy Baker: Yes. She could see that although there is no current "hardship", there could be a financial hardship down the road if Mr. Campbell is unable to sell units due to desirability. She also feels that the "process" needs to be reviewed and revised. VOTE RESULTS: YES: 6 NO: 4 Kathy will meet with Nancy this week before the BRB's Thursday meeting to put in writing the recommendation of the Commission and get it to Felix by Wednesday afternoon. Kathy informed Felix that the Commission would like him to return (at the January COD meeting) and present on the City's Building Code Review. The Commission would like the opportunity to hear what the review committee is deciding and what the requirements are concerning accessibility. Kathy also reiterated that the Commission wants to be involved with the BRB on issues relating to accessibility. Mr. Campbell was informed of the Commission's recommendation. He was also informed of some of the member's concern in granting the variance and the possibility of it being appealed by another party of interest. The meeting concluded at 4:35 pm. Commission on Disability Meeting Minutes Page 5 December 15, 1997 Comlftion on Disability City of Fort Collins December 17, 1997 TO: The Building Review Board FROM: The Commission on Disability RE: RECOMMENDATION FOR CECO REQUEST FOR VARIANCE The regular monthly meeting of the Commission on Disability was held December 15, 1997. The main item of discussion was a presentation by Felix Lee, City Liaison to the Building Review Board, and Mr. Bob Campbell of CECO. The purpose of Mr. Lee's presentation was to compare the 1991 Uniformed Building Code (UBC) to the 1997 UBC and the federal Fair Housing Act.. Mr. Campbell presented his building plans and his rationale for seeking a variance. The Commission on Disability, after hearing the information given, and much discussion, voted 6:4 (6 to 4) in favor of granting Mr. Campbell the variance. However, every Commission member expressed similar misgivings. The question posed by several members was, "Why was the variance request granted in the first place when it specifically states in the City Code that a hardship must be present?" Commission members agree that hardships, as defined by the Code, do not exist in this case. If the code does seem to be unfair or unjust then related boards and commissions should meet to discuss and rewrite the Code to what is fair and reasonable. This process will create specific guidelines for reviewing future variance requests. The Commission on Disability would like to work with the members of the Building Review Board to develop communication between both parties so to provide information and support to each other. 300 LaPorte Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6790 • FAX (970) 221-6329