Loading...
05-15-1985 Special " (J (.) CITY OF EDGEWATER Building Code Board May 15, 1985 Special MeetingrHnutes Chairman Howard called the special meeting to order at 7 p.m. in the Community Center. ROLL CALL Members present:' Messrs. Howard, Vanzin, Cole, Ogram and Hall. Also present: Mr. Fischer, Building Official, and Joan Taylor, Secretary. Present in the audience: David Jones, Assistant Code Enforcement Officer, Gary Robinson and Frank Opal. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Howard asked the members to review the minutes from the May 1 meeting, and said that two items need to be addressed, as called to his attention by Mrs. Taylor. Referring to the fourth paragraph on page three, sixth line, "There is hereby created a building trades regulatory board for the City of Edgewater..." The question as to whether there would be six members or seven members was raised; it had been agreed to add a mechanical installer. The other was to be "one at large." Mr. Howard said this was not discussed, but "one at large" could be anyone. He suggested it state, "one at large from the construction trades." The members agreed to add this to the minutes. Referring to the same paragraph, several sentences down, it states, "Each member shall serve for a term of three (3) years; provided, current members as of the adoption of this ordinance shall serve an interim period as members for thirty (30) days following the adoption of this ordinance, at which time their terms will expire." If this goes into effect, he stated, all the members will need to be reappointed again by the Council. All members agreed that this sentence should be deleted. There were no other changes or deletions to the minutes. Mr. Vanzin moved to accept the minutes with the corrections previously stated. Mr. Hall seconded the motion, which CARRIED 5-0. OLD BUSINESS Continuation of review of duties and functions of the Board This evening the Board will start the section covering the regulation of construction trades, Mr. Howard stated. He referred the members to page nine of the Port Orange ordinance, and the:section on Unlawful Activities. After reviewing the Port Orange ordinance, Mr. Fischer pointed out that this is almost identical to that of the City of Edgewater, Sec. 7-349, except that Edgewater has, in addition, the inclusion in (2), "However, a contractor shall subcontract the electrical, mechanical, gas, swimming pool, pump and irrigation, and plumbing." The Port Orange ordinance excludes gas, swimming pool, pump I.and irrigation. Mr. Vanzin pointed out that these are required by the State Statutes. Also included in the Edgewater Code are (3), ~~'Ab~ndon without legal excuse a construction proj ect or operation." and (4), "Divert funds or property received for the execution or completion of a specified purpose in the execution or completion of such, to any other use whatsoever." The members agreed that the existing Edgewater Sec. 7-349, Unlawful activities, should be retained as is. The next Sec. 7-350, Revocation or suspension of certificate, was studied. Mr. Howard recommended changing the subject to: Revocation or suspension of both the Certificate of Competency and the Certificate of Registration: Hearing; Appeal. The following wording of the body ~s recommended: . 1. The Board may revoke or suspend a certificate of competency or certificate of registration, if, after due hearing, it is found that the holder thereof has: o o a. Violated any of the provls~ons of Section above. b. Obtained his certificate through fraud or misrepresentation. 2. Any person holdng a certificate of competency or registration charged with any of the causes for revocation or suspension enumerated above shall be notified in writing of such charge(s) and said person shall have the right of hearing in person or by counsel before the Board, and he shall be notified in writing of the time and place set by the Board for such hearing, before any action is taken by the Board on suspension or revocation of the certificate. In the event any person charged with any of the causes for revocation or suspension of his certificate fails to appear in person or by counsel before the Board for a hearing thereon, after having been duly notified of the time and place of such hearing, the Board may proceed with the hearing, and in the event such charges are proved, the Board may then proceed with the suspension or revocation of his certificate if such action is deemed by the Board to be proper and in order. The Board may request the person holding a certificate of competency and/or registration to provide any documents which the Board feels are relevant pertaining to the competency of the individual under any provisions of this act. 3. If any person feels aggrieved at a decision of the Board or the Building Official and refusing to grant such person, after he has passed proper examinations, a license, permit or certificate of competency or registration to carryon or engage in the trade, business or occupation for which he has applied or in revoking or suspending a license permit or a certificate of competency or registration, such person may appeal such decision to the Courts. Mr. Howard suggested that the City Attorney may wish to put the above paragraph 3 into legal terminology. Mr. Howard suggested the following: Any decision by the Edgewater Building Trades Regulatory Board shall be final, except that if and when any person feels aggrieved at a decision of the Board or the Building Official and refusing to grant such person, after he has passed proper examinations, a license, permit or certification of competency and/or registration to carryon or engage in the trade, business or occupation for. which he has applied or in revoking or suspending a license permit or a certificate of competency and or registration, such person may appeal such decision to the Courts. The members considered the next section, Insurance Required. Mr. Howard read the section from the Port Orange ordinance. The amount of the insurance was considered. The amount of $100,000 general liability for each person plus $300,000 for each accident is standard. The members agreed to recommend the Port Orange wording. Mr. Howard also suggested that the paragraph calling for the Public Property Damage Surety Bond of $1,000 be added. Mr. Vanzin questioned the need for this; Mr. Howard responded that if a builder does damage to the sidewalks, etc., this pays for such damage. The Chairman asked if the members had any problem with the way the Port Orange ordinance read, or would they rather have it enumerated as is done in the New Smyrna Beach ordinance. Mr. Hall said he thought the part referring to the self-insuror should be left out. Mr. Howard agreed that State law would require them to carry the insurance; the part on the self-insuror is redundant. There was further discussion on this point. All members agreed that the last four lines of the paragraph under Insurance Required should be deleted. It was further agreed that the paragraph on the $1,000 performance bond should be added. The section under Insurance Requirements would read as follows: (a) Every contractor and/or subcontractor granted a license in the City shall be required to maintain at all times, in a Casualty Insurance Company authorized to do business in the State of Florida, a Public Property Damage Surety Bond with a minimum limit of not less than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000) for anyone accident naming the City of Edgewater as obligee. (b) Any contractor as delineated in Section hereinabove entering into an agreement with any person for consideration either for a fixed con- tract price or a costs plus basis, or for anything of value or for a super- vising fee or for a management fee or for a commissions to supervise any work Building Code Board - 2 - May 15, 1985 o o as covered by the terms and provisions of this section shall be held and considered to be carrying on the business of a contractor and the respec- tive trade, and shall be required to furnish sufficient insurance in the amount of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) general liability for each person plus three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) for each accident. The members discussed the next paragraph entitled Suspension of Work from the Port Orange ordinance. They agreed this referred to all construction. Mr. Fischer said he had considered having the contractor of record present at the time of inspection. Mr. Vanzin said that may be all right if they knew when he would be on the job to inspect. Mr. Fischer responded that from the time of call-in for an inspection they have 24 hours to inspect. It was agreed this would present problems in that it could tie up the con- tnactor for a long period of time. Mr. Fischer said that the contractor on some jobs never sees the job site, explaining that the man who has full responsibility on the job and building the house may be unlicensed. The City is not responsible because an active State license must be listed on the building permit. He explained that permits are being pulled by licensed contractors for someone else who is unlicensed. Where are about four inspec- tions during the building of a home. This requirement, that the contractor be present during inspections, would put him on the job site at least four times during construction of the home. Mr. Vanzin said that if he goes to Orlando to build a house he may send a foreman to do the work. He (the contractor) cannot be sitting over there for each inspection. Mr. Fischer said that in that case he could appoint someone to be his agent. Mr. Howard pointed out that the last sentenoe under Suspension of \\1ork would cover that. It reads, "The contractor shall designate, in writing to the Building Official, the responsible managing official or employee who shall be designated for each construction project." Mr. Fischer said he is basically concerned about a contractor selling his license and Mr. Howard pointed out that this is prohibited in the section under Unlawful Activities. Though it may be hard to stop, he suggested that over a period of time, through inspections, the Building Official will know who cannot answer his questions. Whether or not someone responsible should be at the site during inspection was discussed at length. It was suggested by Mr. Vanzin that if there is a special problem, then the contractor could be called to be there. Mr. Howard mentioned the reinspection fee which was authorized a while back; Mr. Fischer said he limits the enforcement of the reinspection fee. He charges a reinspection fee if, when he goes for reinspection, he finds the corrections were not done. Referring again to having the contractor or his.agent on the job site when an inspection is done as proposed by the Building Official, Mr. Vanzin said he cannot go along with that. Mr. Howard asked if he (the Building Official) is talking about every job, or just suspect jobs. Mr. Fischer said that it could be done on reinspection. Mr. Howard recommended that on a suspect job the Building Official should tell whoever is on the job that all work stops until he meets with the contractor of record. Mr. Fischer said he would like to have the sub-contractor put his competency card number and initials on the card on the job site when he is finished. He explained he is having a problem with permits being turned in with the name of one sub-contractor being listed, but when it is time for the work to be done the contractor will get someone else to do the work. Mr. Howard commented that this may be one of the first problems which the Board will need to address - the contractor selling his license. It was agreeable to the members that the section on Suspension of Work from the Port Orange ordinance be recommended. It is: The contractor holding a certificate of competency hereunder shall be responsible for the proper supervision and performance under any building project which he or his firm has undertaken. If such contractor is not physically present on a work site for any extended period during any phase of construction for which he is responsible, he shall designate a respon- sible managing employee or official or his representatives, the subcontrac- tors, suppliers, owners, etc. The contractor shall designate, in writing Building Code Board - 3 - May 15, 1985 o o to the Building Official, the responsible managing official or employee who shall be designated for each construction project. Mr. Cole asked who got the certificate of occupancy, the owner or the builder. Mr. Fischer advised that the owner gets the c.o. Some of the banks require the builder to corne in with a certificate of occupancy if it is a speculation house and the builder wants to get the last draw. It was noted that the builder is responsible for a house for one year. The warranty was discussed at length. Mr. Howard suggested that the items discussed tonight be put into minute form and sent to the City Attorney for his completion of the entire package, and to send it back to the Board for final review and to get ready to send it to the Council. Mr. Hall moved that this be done, seconded by Mr. Vanzin. The motion CARRIED 5-0. NEW BUSINESS Mr. Fischer reminded the members that the 1985 Code Revisions Seminar will be held Friday and Saturday, May 17 and 18. Mr. Fischer said that after the seminar and the Board meets one more time, he would like to have the person expert in the specific trades review the Edgewater Code. He would like to have their recommendations for adding or deleting to the Code, above and beyond what may be adopted for 1985. He explained that he had some complaints from some of the trades people about the requirements of Edgewater above the electrical and mechanical codes. One application has already been received frcma mechanical person who would like to be considered for appointment to the Board. Mr. Howard said this appointment could not be considered until the new ordinance is adopted, if it is. The members discussed having a meeting the third week in June to go over tne attorney's draft. Any other matters which have been pending could be brought before the Board at that time. Mr. Howard asked the secretary to schedule a date and advise the members. The May 2, 1985 letter from the City Clerk concerning a performance bond will be considered at this June meeting, it was agreed. Mr. Cole moved for adjournment, seconded by Mr. Hall. The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m. Minutes prepared by Joan Taylor Building Code Board - 4 - May 15. 1985