Loading...
07-11-1991 CITY OF EDGEWATER BUILDING TRADES REGULATORY AND APPEALS BOARD REGULAR MEETING JULY 11, 1991 7:01 P.M. The Regular meeting of the Building Trades Regulatory and Appeals Board was called Order on July 11, 1991 at 7:01 P.M. in the Conference Room of City Hall by Vice Chairman Gary Butt. ROLL CALL: Members present were Les Ogram, Douglas Cole, Gary Butt, and Michael Nelson. John Ciaffoni arrived at 7:05. Lester Yarnell and Chairman Bob Howard were excused. Also present were Mark Davis, Chief Vola, and Lisa Miller, Board Secretary. The Minutes of the May 16, 1991 Regular Meeting of the Building Trades Regulatory and Appeals Board were submitted for approval. Mr. Nelson moved to accept the minutes as submitted. Mr. Cole seconded. Motion CARRIED 4 -0. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Vice Chairman Butt asked if there had been any changes in Worker's Compensation since the last time the Board had discussed it. Chief Vola stated yes, the day after the last meeting he had called the State again to resolve this and what was told to him was they didn't notify anyone of the changes in the forms. He added he also asked if the Contractors were notified and the State said it was up to them to find out. Chief Vola stated as a result of this he made up a Hold Harmless Agreement and asked the Board if they had any changes or comments they would like to make on it. Vice Chairman Butt asked if it was something the City Attorney should look at. Chief Vola stated he had already sent it to the Attorney, but he couldn't get an answer. Mr. Cole asked if this was the same form as the Worker's Compensation Exemption form. Chief Vola stated that it is not, what happens is if someone came in tomorrow and wanted to open a business he would have to send the form away to the State for it to be approved. He added if it takes 4 -6 weeks to get it processed the Contractor or Subcontractor does not work. Chief Vola stated if the Contractor /Subcontractor fills out a Hold Harmless Agreement we will allow him to pull permits under the idea that the information he has turned in is accurate and there will be no just cause for the State to turn him down. He added in the meantime if we don't do this the Contractor /Subcontractor doesn't work. Mr. Cole stated it was to fill in the gap until the form came back from the State. Chief Vola stated it was to cover the City and the Contractor /Subcontrator's Competency Card would expire in 60 days if the approved form is not received back from the State. Mr. Cole stated the agreement looked good to him. NEW BUSINESS: Vice Chairman Butt stated Mark Davis was here to talk to the Board regarding the Building Allowances on Setbacks. He stated there is house on 2921 Mango Tree Drive that someone had knocked down the form boards, they had to be put them back in place, and they didn't get them exactly where they should have been. 1 Mr. Davis stated they were two inches out on one corner and when they set up the site they intentionally moved in two inches further than what they needed to be. He added when they squared up the building the numbers came out right, but he understands now how the figures can come out right and still pull the one corner. He stated they ended up pouring their stemwall and it was 2 inches out on the Northwest corner. Mr. Davis stated he understands the position the Building and the Planning Department are in because they are fixed with some rigid Ordinances that say things have to be a certain number of feet from the property line to meet the setback rule. He stated something that may be a solution is in some areas he has worked they allow you to have a combination of numbers to meet the setbacks. He stated if they wanted a total side setback of 20 feet whether it is accomplished by 8 feet on one side and 12 feet on the other or 10 and 10 is up to the individual contractor. He added in that way the Contractor can have flexibility in developing the site. Vice Chairman Butt stated there was no tolerance whatsoever. Chief Vola stated he agrees there needs to be some form of tolerance factor in the Ordinance, but with the qualification there be a just cause or reason. He would like this to be able to be brought before a Technical Review Committee of the Building Official, Planning Director, Utilities Director and City Engineer. He stated they should have the leeway to grant a variance on something that is a minor issue, a minor discrepancy that was an error that was beyond his control. He added if it was laid out wrong that is a whole different story, but Mr. Davis' site was vandalized and that could happen to anyone. Chief Vola reminded the Board they could not make the decision because it is a Zoning Ordinance and that is up to the LDRA. He stated the reason it is on here is he would like to see the Building Trades Board make a recommendation to the Land Development Board to allow for a qualified tolerance factor. Vice Chairman Butt asked what was done to correct Mr. Davis' problem. Mr. Davis stated they took off the encroaching two inches. Mr. Davis stated FHA has a list on what they allow for tolerances. Vice Chairman Butt stated it seemed like there should be some way to have a tolerance factor of an inch or two they could go by. Mr. Nelson asked if they cut it off because it would take too long to go before the Zoning Board. Mr. Davis stated yes, it would have been a six week process and that is why when he was asked to come before the Board he said he would as he felt it was a practical problem that could be remedied and close the gap between government regulations and private sector needs. Mr. Davis stated they allow a 2 foot overhang and planters to be erected after construction and these are technically encroachments but a 2 inch infraction on one corner isn't allowed. He stated he liked Chief Vola's idea of a Technical Review Committee. Chief Vola stated that is in the new Land Development Code which is pretty much a Comprehensive Development Code and it primarily deals with commercial, but that is one thing that could be amended in there to include that Technical Review Committee for the purpose of minor variances on Single Family and Duplex Residential Projects. He stated the thing that concerns him is he doesn't know what kind of a cap to put on the tolerance. He stated the Board needed to make that recommendation to LDRA because they are not involved in the Building Trades, they are concerned with zoning, we need to give them a recommendation of a value to put in. 2 Mr. Ciaffoni asked what kind of time factor are they talking about for the Technical Review Board to meet. Chief Vola stated the Technical Review Committee could meet on a bimonthly basis, he stated they already get together for preaps twice a month. Mr. Ciaffoni stated if they miss a meeting then the Contractor would be held up for two weeks. Chief Vola stated it could happen that way. Mr. Ciaffoni stated he understood about putting a blanket on it because some builders would take advantage of it to the fullest extent. He stated he felt there should be something written into it to where the Building Department could make the decision. Chief Vola stated the problem with that is you are trying to give the Building Official authority over a Code he does not have authority over. He stated this is in Zoning. Mr. Ciaffoni suggested the Building Official get together with someone from Zoning and they make a decision rather than having to go to a Technical Board and waiting two weeks. Chief Vola stated the Contractor might not get the answer he wants from just the two of them and it might be better to be heard by a balanced group of three or four people. Mr. Ciaffoni stated if the Contractor didn't get the answer he wanted, then he could go before the Board. Vice Chairman Butt asked if they could just put an inch or two difference into the Ordinance and let the Building Department check it when they get the replat. Chief Vola stated they would be right back to the thing they have now where some of the Contractors would build right up to the fudge factor and that would just decrease the size of the setback. Vice Chairman Butt stated there has to be some sort of tolerance. Chief Vola stated he spoke with the head of the Department with the County and his comment was to tell them not to build to the setback line. Mr. Ogram stated to make the setback 10 foot 4 inches and allow 4 inches of error. Chief Vola stated it doesn't help people like Mr. Davis because it doesn't give him the option of a reasonable opportunity to appeal something because it takes six weeks to get before LDRA. Mr. Davis stated if they were dealing with a homeowner who had sold his house up North and already made their plans and if they had to move into a hotel or something because of the holdup there would be a lawsuit. Mr. Ciaffoni stated he thought the two week period was too long. Chief Vola stated it may be set up on a weekly basis, that is something that needs to be addressed. He stated the Board could recommend the Technical Review Committee meet on a weekly basis and also recommend they allow minor variances for just cause in the setback. He added the Board needed to give him a numerical value and asked for their input. At this time Chief Vola was excused from the meeting for a medical incident that occured outside City Hall. Mr. Davis stated when they replatted his site they were correct on all three corners, there was only one corner that was out. He stated as the demand for larger houses go into areas that have 75 foot or 85 foot wide lots and houses in excess of 2,000 sq. ft. with garage in Florida Shores the likelihood of this coming up on this again is going to happen. Mr. Davis recommended giving the builder the flexibility of a total setback of 20 feet with a minimum of 8 feet from the line. He stated a 2 inch tolerance would be good and he understands the position it puts the Building and Zoning Departments in as to where does it stop. 3 Mr. Davis stated the Board was setting up the right criteria for allowing an adjustment and that is it has to be a justifiable proven cause basis and there will be certain limits. Chief Vola stated the flexible setback idea was good especially with the tree protection Ordinance. Mr. Ciaffoni stated that was the way the County works, they give the Builder a total with a minimum on one side and this works nice for patios and trees. Mr. Nelson stated in the County they don't have replats so if you miss something by 2 inches unless it is obvious to the Building Inspector when he goes out it isn't caught. He stated the flex setbacks are more in the area of Zoning Hearings as far as rewriting the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Ciaffoni stated he thought they should recommend 4 inches flexibility in the worst case, but it would have to be justifiable with documentation. Mr. Cole stated he thought the flexible was a good idea especially for the trees and he thought 2% was a good idea. Mr. Ciaffoni stated 2% would allow four or five inches on a 30 foot setback. He stated when you go with a percentage it gave more room. Mr. Nelson asked if the setbacks were pretty much standard. Mr. Ciaffoni stated they were 10 on the side, 30 on the front, 25 on the back, and 30 on the corner. Mr. Nelson stated there was nothing wrong with setting a set figure of two inches. He said if they were looking at variable setbacks it would be different. Mr. Davis asked if Edgewater has completed their Land Development Regulations because if they haven't this would be a good time for this Board to make a recommendation to the LDRA. Vice Chairman Butt stated the way it is now if there was a tree in the way you have to get a variance before you can do anything and that would take at least a month. Mr. Davis stated the way it hit his schedule was that it would take six weeks. He stated if it could be a percentage or flexible setbacks it would really be a help to the Building Community. Mr. Cole stated he didn't feel two or three inches would hurt. Vice Chairman Butt stated there has to be a tree survey now before there can be any clearing. Mr. Davis stated he does a rough layout of the house, does the clearing and then lays out the house again. He stated its a lot of extra work but it is the only thing to do to save the hardwoods and landscape trees that they want to keep. Mr. Ciaffoni stated they should make a 2 inch variance for hardship. Mr. Davis stated they should define hardship because everybody has a different interpretation and they should use specific language. Mr. Nelson stated they were better off not being specific it is better for them to leave it up to interpretation. He stated the more specific you get on some things the more holes it opens up somewhere else and he feels hardship is a good word to use. He stated it leaves it up to the interpretation of the Board if the hardship was self imposed or if it was imposed on the person. Mr. Ciaffoni moved to recommend to the Zoning Board that there be a flexibility factor of 2 inches for cases of hardship on encroachments and the hardship is to be determined by the Building Department. Mr. Cole seconded. Motion CARRIED 5 -0. Mr. Davis thanked the Board for giving him the opportunity to be heard. The Board thanked Mr. Davis for his input. 4 NEW BUSINESS: Vice Chairman Butt brought up the agenda items of Edgewater Rent -All and the 1991 Building Code Effective Date. As these were items of discussion brought up by Chief Vola, the Board waited until he could be present. Ms. Miller stated she had information regarding the changes the Board had voted on at the previous meeting. She stated the changes were due to go before Council on Monday night. Chief Vola returned at this time and was briefly informed of the items that had been discussed during his absence. Chief Vola stated he would also like the Board's endorsement to explore the variable setbacks. Mr. Nelson stated he felt it was a good idea. Mr. Ciaffoni stated with the trees and everything it would be a good idea. Chief Vola stated trees would be the chief justification for the flexible setbacks. Chief Vola stated about a year ago under Chairman Jack Hayman the Board had discussed the various Codes and appeals process in reference to House Bill 553 dealing with the appeals process and resolution of conflict between the Fire Official and the Building Official and how is was to be resolved. He stated it was discovered there was a comment in there that appeals would be heard by the Building Trades Regulatory and Appeals Board, however when it deals with the Uniform Fire Code or the Life Safety Code NFPA 101, the State Fire Marshall would have authority. He added the Board could hear an appeal, but the Fire Official has the authority to appeal it to the State Fire Marshall. Chief Vola stated as far as Building Codes and the minimum Fire Code this Board is the ultimate authority. He added where Edgewater Rent -All is concerned, the business not the building was sold and at the change of occupancy for the Occupational License a series of inspections were generated. He stated there were two or three legal pages of major violations found. He sited some of the more hazardous violations and informed the Board there were two apartments above the business. He stated there is one means of escape out of the building which is a set of stairs in the back that go over where gas is stored. Chief Vola stated he went over the violations with the owner himself and explained the hazards. He stated the owner did most of the repairs and presented the City with a bill for $1 5,000 for the repairs to his building and refused to put a handrail or modify the headroom of the stairway. He stated this went back and forth for three or four months, the owner refused to file an appeal with the Board, and Council directed him to appeal to the Board if he wanted to get it settled. He stated that is where the Appeal form letter came from and the Board has copies of the owner's reply in their packets. Chief Vola stated the language in the Statute dealing with appeals is very explicit in that if you wish to appeal something of a minimum Code, which the Building Code and the Fire Code are minimum Codes, you must appeal that it creates a hardship and an alternate proposal as to how you will meet the intention of the Code to meet the health or safety factor that you are seeking a variance from. He stated Council said we would not make the owner bob the headroom as it would be a technical problem but Council does want the guardrail up. 5 Chief Vola added to this day the guardrail does not exist and the owner came to the Fire Station and told the Fire Inspector he was not to come back on the property, and he did not have to allow the inspectors to come in and inspect his building. Chief Vola stated this was the owner's right, however the owner was informed the Fire Official has the right to seek an administrative search warrant through the State Attorney's office. He added the owner expressed disbelief that this was true and now he is not returning phone calls and is being very difficult to get in touch with. Chief Vola stated where it stands is the owner has it in his mind the City is requiring him to bring his building up to Code, he doesn't want to do it therefore if he is going to do it, the City has to pay for it. Vice Chairman Butt asked if the owner spent $15,000 and is balking about putting the in the railway. Chief Vola stated yes, as a matter of principle. He stated he wanted the Board to understand what was going on and as they had been working with the guy since November of 1990 to get things resolved. He added short of using legal force he had very few options left Mr. Cole stated he could see some of the owner's points. Chief Vola stated he did also and that was why he was trying to work with him. He added he wanted the Board to be aware of what was going on because they may eventually be hearing an appeal. Mr. Cole stated he thought the owner of the business was also the owner of the building when he agreed with him. Chief Vola stated one of the owner's arguments was how come the City never made him do it before. He added there was no one here to make him do it before as the Inspectors in the Building Department were swamped with new construction, there was neither the time nor the personnel to perform inspections. Chief Vola stated it was at a stand off. Vice Chairman Butt stated the next item on the Agenda was the 1991 Building Codes Effective Date. Chief Vola stated the City Ordinance states the Current Edition of the Southern Standard Building Codes is to be used and the 1991 Codes were released in May and our people are going to a seminar on the 25th of July to get the Code updates. He stated the Department of Community Affairs is in the process of adopting it and when they adopt it Edgewater has no choice but to adopt it. He added he would like to request the Building Department be allowed to use that Code effective September 1st as that would give everyone adequate time to familiarize themselves with it. Mr. Nelson stated there weren't that many changes, just reorganization. He added they entirely redid Chapter 11 regarding egress. Chief Vola stated we normally use Life Safety Code as it is more stringent and State adopted as uniform. Vice Chairman Butt asked if there was any other New Business, there was none. Mr. Ciaffoni moved to adjourn. Mr. Ogram seconded. Meeting adjourned at 8:13 P.M. Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Lisa R. Miller Board Secretary 6