Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBuilding Review Commission - Minutes - 06/29/2023City of Fort Collins Page 1 June 29, 2023 Alan 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 June 29, 2023 A regular meeting of the Building Review Commission was held on Thursday, June 29, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. in person at 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado.  CALL TO ORDER Chair Cram called the meeting to order at 9:07 a.m.  ROLL CALL PRESENT: Cram, Dunbar, Moscrip, Zimmerman, Richards ABSENT: Teplitsky STAFF: Coldiron, Manno, Matsunaka, Ogul, Hayes  PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None.  CONSENT AGENDA 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE APRIL 27, 2023 MEETING. Commissioner Dunbar moved to approve the minutes of the April 27, 2023 meeting. Commissioner Zimmerman seconded. The motion passed 5-0.  CONSENT AGENDA FOLLOW UP None.  CONSIDERATION OF COMMISSION-PULLED CONSENT ITEMS None. Building Review Commission DocuSign Envelope ID: 85118AF2-DE41-4367-9118-53517C2992E1 City of Fort Collins Page 2 June 29, 2023  NEW BUSINESS 2. Custom Flag Company – New License Request Without Exam DESCRIPTION: Mr. Griebling of Custom Flag Company is requesting a new Class C1 license and supervisor’s certificate to be issued without a passing ICC testing certificate of the code year required for a new license or reinstatement of a license. STAFF: Sharlene Manno, Administration Services Manager Staff Presentation Sharlene Manno, Administration Services Manager, stated Mr. Griebling is requesting a new Class C1 license and supervisor’s certificate to be issued without a passing ICC testing certificate of the code year required for a new license or reinstatement of a license. She stated Custom Flag Company is a niche company that offers residential and commercial flagpole installation as well as flag and flag banner sales, and the company has been contracted to complete a 30-foot aluminum flagpole for the City of Fort Collins Parks Department. An initial licensing request was received on March 15, 2023; however, it was returned back to the Custom Flag Company due to outdated forms. A new application packet was received and reviewed on March 27 th, at which time the company requested a sign license and a supervisor’s certificate , though there were some missing items, including the testing, and the license classification was not sufficient to complete the work the company has been contracted to complete. Manno noted ICC testing is required to move forward for licensing as the license and supervisor’s certificate required to complete the project would be a Class C1 due to the height of the pole. Manno stated the issues for staff and Custom Flag Company are that the license classification rises far above what the company actually does and can qualify for and there are no other licensing qualifications that are suitable to place them in. She noted the company does not build full structures yet the C1 testing would cover all aspects of codes required for full structure builds for residential and commercial construction. She stated staff has previously issued limited licensing based on testing and project verifications received for very specific projects; however, that cannot be done without the testing. Manno stated her original staff recommendation was denial for this request given the code requirements; however, she noted the BRC can grant a variance from the City Code sections at issue if one of the following applies: the code imposes peculiar or exceptional particular difficulties to the applicant, the code imposes undue hardship to the applicant, or the applicant demonstrates to the BRC’s satisfaction that it possesses other qualifications not specifically listed in the code that the BRC determines qualify the applicant to perform completely. She stated the BRC could deny the request and require the applicant to provide the G12 ICC testing certificate that covers the 2018 code year, or the BRC could disagree with recommendation and pass a motion to allow the issuance of a new license and supervisor’s certificate without testing. Appellant Presentation Mr. Griebling stated his business is a small, family-owned business and he noted he holds licenses in many other municipalities. He stated flagpole foundations are all designed by engineers, and they guarantee all of their work. Staff Rebuttal Manno reiterated the company does not build full structures; however, she stated the current code language prevents her from being able to issue a license without approval from the BRC. Appellant Rebuttal None. DocuSign Envelope ID: 85118AF2-DE41-4367-9118-53517C2992E1 City of Fort Collins Page 3 June 29, 2023 Commission Questions and Discussion Commissioner Richards asked Mr. Griebling if he has any additional testing or other specialized training that has been completed over the years. Mr. Griebling replied his company belongs to the National Independent Flag Dealers Association which meets on an annual basis to discuss best practices; however, all of his training has been hands-on, not in a formal setting. Commissioner Richards asked if most of his projects occur under a general contractor or if the company is directly contracted. Mr. Griebling replied about 80% of his projects occur under a general contractor with the remainder being directly contracted. Commissioner Richards asked if there have been any issues or failures with any of the installations Mr. Griebling has been a part of. Mr. Griebling replied in the negative. Commissioner Moscrip stated it is apparent the requirements of the Class C1 license well exceed the work of this contractor and asked staff about the requirements for a sign license or a sign installation contractor. Manno replied all of the licensing has the same requirements, though some exclude a testing requirement because there is not a test available through the ICC or there is not a specialized certification that is available for sign companies . She stated this is not classified as a sign and the height and wind resistance of the flagpoles needs to be considered. Commissioner Richards asked if there is a shorter flagpole that would not require the Class C1 license. Manno replied the requirement is driven by the height of the pole and if the request were for a residential flagpole, a D1, or homebuilder, license would be required. Chair Cram asked Mr. Griebling how many flagpoles over 30 feet tall he erects in a given year. Mr. Griebling replied probably 15-20 are installed per year, which is a small portion of the overall business. Commissioner Moscrip stated this seems more appropriate to be covered under a sign license than a C1 license. Commissioner Richards concurred and stated the requirements of the C1 license are above and beyond what is needed. He stated the City currently does not have an appropriate classification and the C1 testing requirement would place an undue hardship on the applicant. Chair Cram suggested allowing this for this single project. Chris Hayes, Assistant City Attorney, stated that would be permissible. Commissioner Moscrip made a motion that the Building Review Commission grant Custom Flag Company’s request for variance from the requirements of City Code Chapter 15 relating to license examination finding the requirements of the Code impose particular and exceptional practical difficulties to the applicant , the requirements of the Code impose undue hardship to the applicant, and the applicant has demonstrated that he possesses other qualifications not specifically listed in the Code, such as experience in constructing flagpoles well over 30 feet in height and the submittal of structural calculations , and further finding that the variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the intent or the purpose of the Code. Commissioner Zimmerman seconded the motion. Commissioner Richards noted the motion did not include language specifically related to the one- time variance. He asked staff if they have had a discussion around creating a classification for this type of license. Marcus Coldiron, Chief Building Official, replied staff is looking at alternative licensing options to account for specialty, niche items. Commissioner Moscrip made an amendment to the motion to include the fact that this variance is for the sole project at City Park. Commissioner Zimmerman seconded the motion. The motion carried 5-0. DocuSign Envelope ID: 85118AF2-DE41-4367-9118-53517C2992E1 City of Fort Collins Page 4 June 29, 2023 2. Training Session STAFF: Chris Hayes, Assistant City Attorney Chris Hayes, Assistant City Attorney, noted the BRC is a quasi-judicial commission and asks in a role analogous to that of a judge; therefore, due process is of paramount importance. He noted it is important the Commissioners avoid any contact with anyone about the substance of what is being decided at its hearings. He provided a summary of the Boards and Commissions Manual and commented on the importance of Commissioners ensuring they are announcing whether they are speaking on their own behalf versus that of the Commission. He also commented on the importance of ensuring members of the public can speak, and discussed open meetings requirements and ex parte communication. He outlined the requirements for going into executive session and noted meeting topics cannot stray from the published agenda. Hayes noted Commissioners should avoid taking gifts to avoid the appearance of impropriety and urged them to err on the side of caution. He noted Commissioners could always contact him for any legal advice. He discussed the regulations for conflicts of interest and Commissioner liability. Commissioner Moscrip asked if the Building Department has the ability to use the decisions made by the Commission as precedent for future licenses. Hayes replied the decisions of the Commission can guide how the Building Department conducts its business; however, he stated he would need to do some research on whether decisions present legally-binding precedence. Coldiron replied his understanding is that the Building Department would not have the authority to grant any variances to the code based on previous decisions of the Commission. Hayes stated he will work with Coldiron to revisit some of the code sections that do not leave room for flexibility. Chair Cram concurred each request is and should be considered on its own merits. Chair Cram noted the appellant has the right to appeal a decision of the Commission to City Council and the decision could be remanded to the Commission. Commissioner Richards asked how the Commission would handle a situation wherein a member of the public has comments that are not related to an item on the agenda. Chair Cram stated he recalls that occurring twice in the past 15 years. Hayes noted those comments can be made, and because they are not related to an issue up for decision, they are not considered to be improperly notices.  OTHER BUSINESS Chair Cram introduced Casey Roberts, who will be the new Commissioner on the BRC beginning in July. Mr. Roberts introduced himself and discussed his experience in architecture. Chair Cram asked if a review of the new Building Code will be forthcoming. Coldiron replied a steering committee will begin meeting in the spring and will go before Council in late 2024 or early 2025.  ADJOURNMENT Chair Cram adjourned the meeting at 10:09 a.m. Minutes prepared by TriPoint Data and respectfully submitted by Al Ogul. Minutes approved by a vote of the Commission on _________________________________ ______________________________ Marcus Coldiron, Chief Building Official Alan Cram, Chair July 27, 2023 DocuSign Envelope ID: 85118AF2-DE41-4367-9118-53517C2992E1