Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES Community Development Committee 2008-01-03RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado, January 3, 2008 Minutes of a Regular meeting of the COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE of the Town of Estes Park, Larimer County, Colorado. Meeting held in Town Hall in said Town of Estes Park on the 3rd day of January 2008. Committee: Attending: Also Attending: Absent: Chairman Pinkham Trustees Eisenlauer and Levine Chairman Pinkham and Trustee Eisenlauer Town Administrator Halburnt, Directors Pickering, Kilsdonk, Mitchell, Managers Winslow, Marsh and Blackhurst, Chief Building Official Birchfield and Town Clerk Williamson Trustee Levine Chairman Pinkham called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. PUBLIC COMMENT. None. CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU. Frost Giant Road Closure - Request Approval. The Annual Frost Giant Race is scheduled January 27, 2008. The 5K and 10K foot races will begin at the Municipal Building/MacGregor Ave. This event is sponsored by the EVRPD. The request is to close MacGregor Ave. from Elkhom Ave. to Park Ln. from 7:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. EVRPD is also requesting the use of the lobby and Board Room. Town Clerk Williamson stated a use form would need to be completed prior to the scheduled event and the district would need to agree to any and all cleaning costs and property damage. The carpet in the Board Room had to be professionally cleaned after last year’s event. The Committee recommends approval of the road closure as described above and the use of the Board Room for the event. Reports. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings. • Marketing Committee • Visitors Services MUSEUM/SENIOR CENTER. Reports. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings. • Museum Monthly • Senior Center Monthly COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. Building Permit Fees - Discussion Chief Building Official Birchfield stated Mr. and Mrs. Brown applied for a building permit to add a bedroom, bathroom and move a kitchen in their home. The Browns disagree with staffs interpretation and application of the fee calculation and assessment process. Issues related to staffs interpretations of the code are a matter of the Board of Appeals, local amendment specifies the Community Development Committee shall provide direction for determining project valuations. The adopted permit fee schedule is based on the valuation of a project; therefore, permit fees are directly related to project valuations. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development - January 3, 2008 - Page 2 Mr. Birchfield reviewed the permit application and the method used to determine permit fees by the Building Department. Staff calculates the total valuation of new construction, such as an addition, using the square footage versus a bid price for a remodel. He stated the current dollar valuation per sq. ft. for new residential dwellings was approved with the adoption of the 2003 l-Codes in 2005 and was a 30% increase from the previous valuation. Trade journals and local conditions were reviewed to determine the increase. The fee schedule applied to the total valuation (square footage X dollar valuation per square footage) determines the permit fee. The fee schedule was adopted with the 1997 Uniform Building Code in 1998 and has not increased in nearly 10 years. Only the square footage valuation has increased. At the time an application is submitted, the applicant provides their estimate for total valuation including labor and materials. The Browns estimated the project would cost $20,000 due to the labor being provided by the homeowners and the use of recycled materials. The calculated valuation by staff was $85,463.20 with a permit fee of $1,884.84 that equates to 2.2% of the total project evaluation. Chief Building Official Birchfield commented that permit fees range from 1.5% to 3% of the total evaluation and as the construction cost increase the percentage decreases. He stated it generally does not take more time to inspect the foundation of a 2,000 sq. ft. home versus a 5,000 sq. ft. home; and therefore, the costs of inspections are not greater with a larger home. Chief Building Official Birchfield reviewed a 2004 building permit applied for by the Browns in which the building permit fees were calculated in error by a former employee and a plan review fee was not collected. The fees were based on the applicants estimated project costs instead of determining the project valuation by square footage. Therefore, the permit fee in 2004 was .47% of the total valuation versus 2.2% for the current application. Staff is preparing to adopt the new l-Codes in the next two years and will hold workshops to gain input from the contractors prior to the adoption and addition of local amendments. The current local amendments state the valuations shall be determined as directed by the Community Development Committee. The code intends the permit fees to be equitably assessed and adequate to fund the administration, inspection and plan review services provided by staff. Staff is requesting direction from the Committee on how to determine fees in the future with the adoption of the new codes. Roger Brown asserts the adopted square foot valuations have streamlined the review process for the Building Department. The impact on the individual was not considered when the fees were adopted. He stated the square foot valuation should not be used and that each individual permit should be reviewed, one fee structure does not fit all. Contractors can build homes in Estes Park for $80 per square foot versus the $114.76 assessed by the Building Department for new residential construction. Therefore, the permit valuation is higher for his project than the actual cost of construction, increasing the permit fee. Mr. Brown stated this is not a standard situation in that he will be completing the work himself and will be using recycled materials. He offered to bring in receipts after the construction to assess actual costs of the project and determine accurate permit fee. Chief Building Official Birchfield informed the Committee that receipts to determine valuation are only used with remodels by contractor bid. Town Administrator Halburnt stated the l-Codes assess a value for the work to be completed versus the actual cost of the work. Discussion followed as to how fees are determined in other jurisdictions. Chief Building Official Birchfield commented that most other jurisdictions have impact fees that are collected. However, fees are determined on a local level and include situations in which fees are extremely high to limit growth or low to encourage growth. There is no fee schedule in the codes, a fee schedule must be adopted by the local amendment. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Community Development - January 3, 2008 - Page 3 Chairman Pinkham stated the valuation and fee schedule needs to be reviewed to alleviate any inequities: however, determining valuation is not the role of the Committee. Chief Building Official Birchfield has applied the valuation and fee schedule as adopted equitably. The code ensures that regardless of who is building, the property owner gets a quality product and there is a cost associated with this service. He thanked the Browns for their time and for bringing fon^/ard the complexities of the issue. After further discussion, the Committee suggested the Browns submit an application to the Board of Appeals. Reports. Reports provided for informational purposes and made a part of the proceedings. • Financial Report • Building Permit Summary There being no further business. Chairman Pinkham adjourned the meeting 10:10 a.m. I ifi rrf--OrOVv ie Williamson, Town Clerk