Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/27/2012 - Building Review Board - Agenda - Regular MeetingCommunity Development & Neighborhood Services 281 N. College Avenue PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522 970.416.2740 970.224.6134 - fax fcgov.com BUILDING REVIEW BOARD September 27, 2012 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm City Council Chambers 300 LaPorte Avenue AGENDA 1. Approve minutes from the August 30, 2012 Meeting 2. Urban Agriculture Land Use Code Changes 3. Student Housing Action Plan (SHAP) 4. Contractor Violation Hearing: David Houts 5. Follow-Up Reports:  None. 6. Other Business  Budget Update  2012 I-Code Review Update FORT COLLINS BUILDING REVIEW BOARD Regular Meeting – August 30, 2012 1:00 p.m. Council Liaison: Kelly Ohlson Staff Liaison: Mike Gebo (416-2618) Chairperson: Alan Cram A regular meeting of the Building Review Board was held on Thursday, August 30, 2012 at 1:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Fort Collins Municipal Building at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Alan Cram Andrea Dunlap Justin Montgomery Torey Lenoch Rick Reider Jeffrey Schneider George Smith EXCUSED ABSENCES: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Delynn Coldiron, Customer & Administrative Services Manager Mike Gebo, Chief Building Official Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorney ROLL CALL The meeting was called to order and roll call was taken. 1. APPROVAL OF JULY 26, 2012 MINUTES: A motion was made by Schneider to approve the July 26, 2012 minutes as written. Smith seconded the motion. Vote: Yeas: Smith, Dunlap, Schneider, Cram, Reider, Lenoch Nays: None Abstain: None 2. CONTRACTOR LICENSING ORDINANCE CHANGES Mike Gebo, Chief Building Official, noted that the Contractor Licensing Ordinance revisions would be going before City Council and described the public outreach aspects of the process. Gebo then proceeded to review the proposed changes with the Board. There was a question as to whether a building owner has the option to deconstruct a building rather than demolish it. Gebo replied that this is currently an option; however, he expects that Council will continue to raise the bar in terms of the sustainability and recycling aspects of the new International Codes. It was noted by a board member that deconstruction costs are much higher and ultimately get passed on to the end user. BRB – August 30, 2012 - Page 2 Gebo noted a change requiring a licensed professional to complete deconstruction on any project. He added that the aspects of what and how much deconstruction will be required are part of another code section. Smith asked if the exemption portion would apply to homeowners, allowing them to deconstruct anything related to their personal residence and associated buildings. Gebo replied in the affirmative. Smith asked if these changes would have any impact on the National Center for Craftsmanship. Gebo replied that a company deconstructing a building would need to be licensed. Smith stated this group is a non-profit and provides a valuable service. Gebo replied that the licensing would ensure that the party in charge of deconstruction has the necessary knowledge base for deconstruction and would require this organization to get a license if they were performing this type of work. Gebo discussed the nominal registration fee for an exempt specialized trade worker and noted the language changes relating to the list of items which cannot be completed except by a licensed contractor. Schneider asked why stairs and landings are included in the exemptions. Gebo replied this section refers to the exterior steps and landings, which are typically poured concrete. He explained that a stair or landing system within a building would require a permit to be pulled by a licensed contractor. Gebo stated he could make that clarification in the language. Gebo discussed the renewal process changes for licensed contractors, which include eliminating the requirement that applicants seeking a renewal must attend a live or taped review of the code changes. He added that it will now be the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that they are up to date on current codes and that this would be apparent by City staff based on inspection results. Gebo stated electricians and plumbers licensed through the State have now been brought under the contractor license ordinance. He noted that these requirements had been in separate portions of the City Code. Additionally, he reviewed a change to increase the time prior to a Building Review Board meeting that a contractor license can be suspended, when necessary. Gebo discussed the proposed insurance requirement changes, which increased liability amounts from $300,000 per person to $1,000,000 per person, and from $600,000 per accident to $2,000,000 per accident. Schneider suggested the language be changed from “per person” to “per occurrence” and suggested “per accident” be changed to “aggregate” to be more in keeping with common insurance industry language. Schneider asked if staff is of the opinion that additional applications will come before the Building Review Board as a result of the proposed changes. Gebo replied most applications will be handled administratively; however, any questions will be taken to the Board as is done currently. He did not feel that the changes would increase cases coming before the Board. Dunlap asked if accidents occurring in another jurisdiction are registered with the City of Fort Collins and used as additional information when screening contractors. Gebo stated that this is not done; however, staff does personally contact references provided for contractors to determine if there were issues or concerns on the job they completed. This information is used as part of the approval process. BRB – August 30, 2012 - Page 3 Lenoch made a motion to support the proposed contractor licensing changes. Schneider seconded the motion. Vote: Yeas: Smith, Dunlap, Schneider, Cram, Reider, Lenoch, Montgomery Nays: None Abstain: None 3. FOLLOW-UP REPORTS  Tonya Zook, 312 East Pitkin Gebo stated that Mr. Zook agreed to make the repairs required by the Board. Following an inspection yesterday, the electrical items had been repaired and attempts had been made to cover the insulation in the kitchen cabinets and to paint and seal the shower base. Gebo stated it may be prudent to document to Mr. Zook that the inspection had occurred and note that the items need to be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition. Should the items come up again, the issue will immediately come before the Board. Gebo noted future appeals will be considered differently and with more detail. 4. OTHER BUSINESS:  Community Scorecard The new Community Scorecard was provided to the Board. Delynn Coldiron, Customer and Administrative Services Manager, stated items related to Building and Development are under the Economic Health section and offered to answer any questions. The Board was appreciative of the information, but had no questions.  2012 International Code Review Update Gebo stated that the new committee had its first meeting and will begin with the Residential Code for review. He stated staff has the goal to place the update on a Council work session agenda by this time next year, after reviewing the five core Codes, with the item to be presented for Council consideration by the end of 2013. Staff intends to stay up-to-date with the three- year cycle for International Code updates.  Budget Coldiron informed the Board that all of the offers related to building and development issues fall under the Economic Health category in the budget. She explained that public input is allowed at public budget hearings or regular Council meetings. Coldiron stated that all indications are positive, to this point, regarding the department’s submitted offers. She offered to forward any comments from the Board to the appropriate Finance staff.  October Meeting Gebo noted that the October Building Review Board meeting has been cancelled. BRB – August 30, 2012 - Page 4 Meeting adjourned at 2:06 p.m. _____ Mike Gebo, Chief Building Official Alan Cram, Chair 1 SHAP Draft Action Items August 2012 Based on all Focus Groups, Large Group Deliberative Dialogue, and smaller/focused stakeholder meetings (July 20, 2011; August 30, 2011; October 27, 2011; November 2, 2011; November 29, 2011; January 27, 2012; April 4, 2012; June 27, 2012; July 18, 2012; July 25, 2012) City Council Work Sessions – February 14, 2012; July 24, 2012; August 14, 2012 Mission: To develop community driven strategies that encourage and provide an adequate supply of quality student housing while maintaining neighborhood quality and compatibility. Draft Action Items Time Frames Resourcing Immediate-Short Term = now–1 year Existing – can be done with existing resources or funded within current budget Mid Term = 1-2 years Future – needs to be budgeted in future budget cycle Long Term = 2+ years Assessment – has merit but needs more work/assessment/study Land Use Code, Compatibility, Design Action Item Time Frame Responsibility Resourcing 1. Require Medium Density Mixed-Use Neighborhood (MMN) zone standards to apply to all multi-family projects, particularly outside the Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Overlay Zone, by incorporating these sections into the Land Use Code (LUC) General Standards. Short – part of Phase 1 LUC Council 1st Reading – 9/4/12 City – Community Development Neighborhood Services (CDNS) Existing 2. Modify Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone district to ensure a significant commercial component. Short – part of Phase 1 LUC Council 1st Reading – 9/4/12 City - CDNS Existing 3. Require an operation, management and security study for larger multi-family developments. Short – part of Phase 1 LUC Council 1st City - CDNS Existing 2 Reading – 9/4/12 4. Improve definition of “compatibility”. Short City - CDNS Existing 5. Consider using the concept of “Intensity” as a measure to go along with the current “Density” measure. Address the adverse impacts of more intense developments by evaluating whether changes are needed to address intensity of development (TOD - Transportation Overlay District Boundary changes or defining “Student Housing”). Short – part of Phase 2 LUC – P&Z work session 9/14/12 City - CDNS Existing Assessment ? 6. Consider additional requirements for projects that have a certain percentage of units that are 4+ bedrooms (multi-family developments limit the number of 4- bedroom units to 30% of the overall units). Short – part of Phase 2 LUC – P&Z work session 9/14/12 City - CDNS Existing 7. Implement a Neighborhood Compatibility and Design Committee to provide input regarding development proposals (they would also be able to help determine/define the neighborhood character). Short City – CDNS Community members Existing 8. Increase open space requirements (landscaping or green space) to buffer single- family homes from multi-family developments. Short - Mid City - CDNS Existing 9. Modify Neighborhood Commercial Buffer (NCB) zone requirements to reflect the intent that it is a buffer and should not allow high density developments. Short - Mid City - CDNS Existing 10. Modify LUC and other zoning documents to include good examples (photos, drawings, etc.) about what is allowed in certain zones. Mid - Long City - CDNS Existing 11. Incentivize or require diversifying multi-family housing – include more “house-type” options and define them separately (like townhouses, row houses, etc.). Mid – Phase 3 LUC City - CDNS Existing 12. Consider a “University District or Overlay Zone” defined by a specific geographic area that would have specific allowances and requirements based on the housing needs and existing neighborhood character. This University District would address the “rent by the bedroom” intensity impacts on existing neighborhoods. CSU would be involved and consulted in the enhanced management plans for complexes primarily housing CSU students. Building design, compatibility, and Mid – Phase 2 LUC – P&Z work session 9/14/12 City of Fort 3 historic elements of this district should also be defined. 13. Review and update the West Central Neighborhoods Plan. Mid – Long – Phase 3 LUC City - CDNS 2013-2014 Budget Process 14. Modify the City’s LUC to incentivize increased density in appropriate zone districts and locations (i.e. when five stories are appropriate, the project does not need a more stringent review process). Mid - Long City - CDNS ? 15. Provide incentives for non-students to occupy houses in neighborhoods close to campus (i.e. tax incentives for owner occupancy). Long City – Social Sustainability Future Assessment 16. Ensure adequate supply of quality housing for Front Range Community College students. Mid - Long City FRCC ? Parking and Traffic Action Item Time Frame Responsibility Resourcing 17. Work with Colorado State University (CSU) to examine parking fees – are they the right level? What are the economic incentives? What are the impacts to the neighborhoods? (Parking Study and CSU involvement) CSU has a new parking fee structure and will assess it as the academic year moves forward. At this point, CSU has not seen any downward trend in permit sales which could indicate there won’t be an increased parking impact on surrounding neighborhoods.  YTD sales in commuter students and faculty/staff are both up (approx 350 more permits than last year at this time)  Resident hall permits are down in sales (approx 150 permits) but Braiden is under construction and they are encouraging Zipcar use  CSU plans to conduct a parking and transportation study this fall Short - Mid City of Fort Collins CSU Neighborhoods Existing 2013-2014 Budget Process Assessment 4 18. Implement a neighborhood parking permit program or 2-hour parking limits – after evaluating what programs will work in what neighborhoods depending on their specific needs. (Parking Plan is scheduled for City Council review on October 2, 2012). Short – Mid – Phase 3 LUC City of Fort Collins Neighborhoods Existing 2013-2014 Budget Process 19. Explore with CSU in developing an enhanced transit service to surrounding neighborhoods, with a connection to MAX (the Mason BRT Transit station on Main Campus). This enhanced service may include a park ‘n ride located on the CSU Foothills Campus or South Campus. Short - Mid CSU Existing 20. Consider increasing parking requirements for multi-family developments with 4+ bedroom units. Mid City Existing 21. Consider allowing current parking areas to be rented or used for future development. Short - Mid City - CDNS Existing 22. Implement Phase 3 of the Transit Plan, Bicycle Plan, and Pedestrian Plan – viable transit beyond MAX is necessary for student housing to work – expand circular plan to make east/west connections - examine the impact of bicycles and pedestrians on intersections and trails Long City - Transportation Future 23. Build an above- or below-grade pedestrian/bicycle crossing at or near Shields and Elizabeth Streets. Long City - Transportation Future CSU Housing Action Item Time Frame Responsibility Resourcing 24. CSU will evaluate and strive to provide enough on-campus housing (either in halls or apartments) for all first year and international students as well as 25% of returning students, based on projections and actual CSU enrollment numbers (both numbers and demographic breakdown). Recommend CSU to continue to consider business models and other options to incentive students to live on campus for a second year and beyond. On-going CSU Existing Future? 25. Recommend CSU to continually explore options for public/private partnerships to provide student housing, and to look at other examples and best practices around the country. On-going CSU Existing 26. Recommend CSU to look at alternate sites for student housing as they refine their Master Plan. Mid - Long CSU Existing 5 27. CSU will present on-campus housing updates annually to the City/CSU Liaison Committee, and seek other opportunities to share this information. Providing more information regarding current and future on-campus housing projects will help clear up the community’s misconceptions about what CSU is doing. Short - Mid CSU City Existing Accountability and Education Action Item Time Frame Responsibility Resourcing 28. Increase enforcement of nuisance and noise ordinances in areas with a high concentration of complaints. Consider increased enforcement efforts on repeated violations – modify code language to enable Code Compliance to issue citations immediately for repeated violations. Short City – CDNS, Police Existing Future 29. Increase education and information about enforcement so the community is more aware of the enforcement process and data related to enforcement action (there is a perception that Police are reluctant to issue noise citations). Regularly provide data and trends about noise and nuisance violations to the community – pinpoint data on maps. Short City – CDNS, Police Existing 30. Consider increasing proactive enforcement on noise/parties and occupancy violations (complaint-driven nature of these codes makes it more difficult on neighbors because they are reluctant to complain). Mid City – CDNS, Police Assessment 31. Increase education efforts about the Party Registration program and ensure it creates benefits to the neighborhoods. Short City – CDNS CSU Existing 32. Increase educational outreach to students based on current needs/concerns so issues are addressed in a timely manner. Target students both in residence halls and off campus. Focus on more realistic education about what it means to move off campus into a neighborhood. Short City – CDNS CSU Existing 33. Consider requiring property managers/owners to provide City ordinance information to their tenants at lease signing. Mid City - CDNS Assessment 6 34. Form an ongoing advisory committee made up of City, CSU and FRCC leaders, neighbors, students, property managers, Police, and ASCSU to guide City Council on student housing issues. Mid City of Fort Collins CSU FRCC Neighbors Students Property managers/owners ? 35. Provide education and information to parents of students – particularly those who buy properties for their children – so they are aware of local codes, ordinances and responsibilities. Push this information during peak housing times (both spring and August) and repeat this message often. Short City of Fort Collins CSU Assessment 36. Provide incentives for students to take Renting 101, a class that could offer a “preferred tenant” certificate that landlords recognize. Short City – CDNS CSU Landlords Existing or Future 37. Consider rental licensing in order to ensure health/safety of units, data regarding rentals, increased accountability of the rental business (options – either only in the University District area or city wide). Consider requiring property managers and landlords to take the City’s Landlord Education Series. Long City of Fort Collins ? Future Assessment 38. Consider requiring operation management plan for single-family housing as well as multi-family housing. Long City of Fort Collins ? Future Assessment 1 Student Housing Action Plan Update Building Review Board September 27, 2012 Beth Sowder, Neighborhood Services Manager 2 SHAP Mission To develop community driven strategies that encourage and provide an adequate supply of quality student housing while maintaining neighborhood quality and compatibility. 3 SHAP Project • Collaborative effort • Need identified • Scope and issues identified • Data collection • Background information • CSU and other stakeholders 4 Process • Focus Group – Developers/Designers – July 2011 • Focus Group – Neighbors/Property Owners – August 2011 • Questionnaire to stakeholder participants (students, neighbors/property owners, and developers) • Focus Group – Students – October 2011 • Focus Group – Neighbors/Property Owners – November 2011 • Combined Student & Neighbor/Property Owner Focus Group – November 29, 2011 • FRCC – student Focus Group – January 27, 2012 • City Council Work Session – February 14, 2012 • Large Group Deliberative Dialogue – April 4, 2012 5 Process Continued Focused Small Group Stakeholder Meetings: • June 27, 2012 – Land Use Code, Compatibility & Design • July 18, 2012 – Parking and Transportation • July 25, 2012 – CSU Housing, Education, Accountability • August 29, 2012 – Public Open House 6 Draft Action Items • Action Items within each category • Draft form • Looking for feedback and priority level • “Like” or “Dislike” • Comments • Provide feedback here or on-line survey at fcgov.com/studenthousing 7 Next Steps • Input/feedback from Boards & Commissions – Affordable Housing Board – 9/6/12 – Planning & Zoning Board – 9/14/12 – Landmark Preservation Commission – 9/26/12 – Building Review Board – 9/27/12 • Council Work Session – 10/23/12 Collins CSU Community Members Assessment *Many questions need to be answered before moving forward with this idea.