September 19, 2013 Minutes (Development Services Conference Room)
|
CONTRACTOR LICENSING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: |
|
Dennis Odgers, Kevin Chaney, Ryan Kruse, Doug Dillon, Verlon Myers, Joe Caldwell, Dan Riedemann, Greg Rau, Barry Walthall
|
|
BUILDING CODE BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
|
|
Dennis Odgers, Dan Wethington, Sean Reardon, Neal Ezell |
|
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
|
None (Contractor Licensing Board); Micah Kimball (Building Code Board) |
|
|
|
|
|
STAFF PRESENT: |
|
Kurt Schroeder, Barry Walthall, Adrian Jones, Rhonda Peterson |
|
|
|
|
|
PUBLIC PRESENT: |
|
Gary
Stussie |
Walthall called the Contractor Licensing Board meeting to order at 11:02 a.m.
Election of Officers
Walthall said there are currently no officers elected, so the first order of business will be to take nominations and vote on board officers.
As no one stepped forward with a nomination, Walthall suggested Caldwell be nominated as Chair. Caldwell asked how long the term lasts. Walthall said it is a one year term. Caldwell accepted the nomination.
Walthall moved to elect Caldwell as Chair of the Contractor Licensing Board for a one year term. Motion was seconded by Rau. Motion passed 9-0.
Caldwell asked for nominations for the Vice Chair position. Myers nominated himself for Vice Chair. No other nominations were presented.
Caldwell moved to elect Myers as Vice Chair of the Contractor Licensing Board for a one year term. There was no second. Motion passed 9-0.
Ezell moved to reconvene the Building Code Board meeting. Motion was seconded by Wethington. Motion passed 3-0.
New Business
Caldwell moved to the new business item up for discussion, the code change request from FlatSafe Tornado Shelters, LLC. Walthall said he would give a brief overview of the request.
Walthall said the discussion today is to consider a request for a code change to the contractor licensing regulations. There is a contractor who would like to submit a permit to install a specific type of storm shelter, and they do not feel they fit within the City’s current contractor licensing regulations. Walthall believes there is a certain amount of validity to their claim. The contractor does not have a person in its organization who would qualify as a Class A, B or C contractor. In order to pull a permit for the work, a contractor’s license is required. The contractor has asked for an alternative solution, either to not require a license for the type of work they do, which would be a violation of the licensing regulations and the City code; or to establish an alternative licensing category.
In taking that request under consideration, city staff has come up with a proposed amendment to the licensing regulations that creates a Class L (Limited) contractor classification. The proposal for that classification would be that applicants for the Class L license would come before the Contractor Licensing Board, present their credentials, and the Board would make a decision on whether to grant a license or not. The license that would be issued would be very specific in scope; using the tornado installer’s application as an example, it would be for the installation of below garage slab tornado shelters only. The contractor would not be able to pull permits for other types of tornado shelter work or for any other building construction work. In FlatSafe’s case, they have not yet actually applied for a license, but they have provided the information that is in the packet which was given to each Board member. It provides information on their installation standards and provides plans that are approved by a structural engineer. City staff did not want to address this one contractor’s issue and leave potential issues still out there in the future for other specialized contractors. Walthall said he is happy to answer any questions the Board may have as he has had several hours of discussion with the applicant.
Myers asked if the contractor’s work would be limited to strictly below grade. Walthall replied yes, this particular contractor’s work is for below grade construction. He did remind the Board the topic up for discussion is whether or not to create this special contractor licensing category. After that decision has been made, the Board can then potentially discuss whether or not this specific contractor might be pre-approved pending City Commission approval of the licensing change.
Wethington asked if the licensing category was for below grade tornado shelters. Walthall said the specific request is for a below grade contractor license; the Class L Limited specialty contractor classification could be for almost anything. That contractor applicant would apply to the Board, present their credentials and the Board would give approval, or not, for a very limited scope of work. Wethington asked if that meant the City would provide licensure that’s broad enough to encompass whatever tornado shelters the applicant might bring to the Board, as long as they can provide proper credentials. Rau and Walthall pointed out the application might be for something other than tornado shelters.
Rau asked if that meant a Class L license would be issued for one specific type of work. Walthall said that is correct.
Reardon said at this point, the City just wants to create the Class L license so it has the ability to issue licenses to specialty contractors. Walthall replied yes.
Ezell asked if that means there are no continuing education requirements. Walthall said they would have to comply with all of the other regulation requirements, which includes continuing education for renewals, general liability insurance and workers compensation insurance. They would also be subject to the disciplinary actions of the Board and City, just like any other contractor. This proposal is only to create another category.
Chaney asked if other cities have done this. Walthall said not that he is aware. Johnson County, after which the city has modeled a lot of its programs, has not done anything similar to this. When he was discussing the alternatives with the FlatSafe representative, they did mention they have a City of Wichita license. They have a category for not otherwise specified contractors. Walthall said it did not correlate directly to anything the City of Lawrence does, but staff thought it might be something the Board might consider. Schroeder said the concept of the not otherwise specified contractor is the basis for the Class L license.
Odgers asked if staff sees this safe room falls outside the normal scopes of work for concrete and general excavation work. Walthall said a licensed contractor with an A, B or C contractor classification would be able to pull a permit to do this type of work. FlatSafe feels that it’s specialized enough that they don’t have expertise in other building construction elements that would allow them to qualify for the Class A, B or C license. They do, however, feel they are very qualified to do this specific type of installation. Walthall added as his position as a city staff member, he sees the benefit of adding a Class L license category. He would not feel very comfortable issuing this company a Class A, B or C license which would give them free reign to do other types of construction work under that license, which they themselves have stipulated they do not feel qualified to do.
Riedemann asked if the Board then only needs to make a decision regarding a new license category; that liability, for instance, is not at issue. He asked if city staff feels there is an issue with liability when taking this type of work into consideration where there is a big hole in the garage floor. He asked if the contractor carries all of the liability if the installation fails. Walthall said he does not believe the City would share in any liability if the installation was made according to the specifications that were provided. That responsibility would fall on the contractor. Their process and their procedures have been through a review by the National Storm Shelter Association and theoretically meet the standards for FEMA and ICC 500 storm shelters.
Riedemann asked if FlatSafe owns the specific technology that’s being presented, or if they are simply the installer. Walthall said his understanding is that they own the rights, that it is a proprietary product. Walthall said he would feel more comfortable if the FlatSafe representative was present to answer that question.
Gary Stussie introduced himself and said he would like to answer that question. He is one of at least two people in the city who have contacted FlatSafe for an install of the shelter in his home. He said FlatSafe owns the patent to the storm shelter, and it is unique in that it is a single door shelter. Other models have double doors so that in the event the door is damaged, it is difficult to open from inside the shelter. FlatSafe’s single door rolls off of the storm shelter, so it can have 2 tons of debris on top of it, but the come along will allow it to be opened from the inside. Stussie said he has done a lot of research after the tornadoes destroyed the apartments in Lawrence. He said FlatSafe’s design is non-intrusive and relatively inexpensive.
Ezell asked how much FlatSafe’s shelters cost. Stussie replied there are three different models. One is aluminum with a 10 year warranty. One is a type of plastic, which is the one he is considering, and it has a 20 year warranty. The cost for it is approximately $6,000 with a 4 hour installation time. It will accommodate seven people. A picture of it is included in the packet.
Schroeder referred back to Riedemann’s question. He said the Board has two things to consider. One item is the code change adding the Class L designation. The second would be the consideration of each individual application as they are presented.
Jones introduced himself. He is the Senior City Plans Examiner and performs the reviews of permits and documents for building permit applications. He is also the former structural inspector for the City. His first concern is the time it would take to convene the Board to review these applications when they come in. Jones’s main concern is evaluating the requirements of the installers. Site conditions will be a concern. Sometimes the backfill in basement garages is anything left over from the job site. If the garage is backed up against a walk-out basement, the structural stability of the garage or backfill would need to be inspected. Jones wants to know what level of expertise the Board will be looking for when it reviews these applications.
Caldwell asked how does the Board protect against that, or is it even the Board’s job to protect against that. Walthall said he does not believe it is the Board’s job to do that. The Board is responsible for determining whether the contractor has the applicable credentials to obtain a license. It is the building department’s job to work with the quality of the construction and make sure it complies with the codes. It is the contractor’s job to get the job done in accordance with the codes and be structurally sound. Schroeder said part of the answer to that question would be perhaps that if the contractor did get a license to pull permits, an inspection could be completed when the hole was cut in the garage. If something was found at that time that appeared to be an anomaly, something could be done at that time, possibly have an engineer look at the site or have a soil report done.
Chaney asked what examples have the owners and operators given staff that shows they qualify to do this type of work. Walthall said they have provided information that shows they are in good standing with the National Storm Shelter Association; there is information in the packet that describes exactly what that means. There are no direct certifications provided for college degrees or exams to be taken; they base their qualifications on the engineering process they went through to get the product approved.
Chaney asked if FEMA puts on any certification courses for this type of install. Walthall said his understanding is they do not. He said he tried to get a clear understanding from the contractor as to what they feel makes them qualified to do this work; what are the experience, qualifications and background of their qualifying individual, and what do they provide as training for their employees. The contractor kept talking about their product. They feel their qualifications lie with their relationship with the National Storm Shelter Association and the compliance verification process they are required to go through to maintain their standing with that organization.
Wethington added the NSSA is just a clearinghouse to look up the manufacturer with the engineer to get a manufactured solution to the product that they’re making. What staff is asking the Board to do is certify that this contractor is going to come in and perform at a level and quality the City of Lawrence is going to accept to install this structure. Walthall said what staff is asking for is considering a code change to accept a new licensing category, then as the Board reviews applications under that licensing category the Board would look more closely at what those licensing qualifications should be as a contractor.
Walthall said the Board may want to develop a list of questions to ask FlatSafe as they do not have a representative present to answer those questions. Stussie said he could contribute some information to this discussion. As an interested party who wants to have one of these shelters at his residence, he has completed a lot of research. He said FlatSafe has been installing these structures for three years in Oklahoma City. He checked with the Better Business Bureau, and in that three years they have had one complaint and it was from a person who didn’t get a bonus for recommending another company do the work. FlatSafe has been installing them as fast as they can, especially with the recent round of tornadoes. He said what convinced him to use this product is that during the coverage of the tornado damage in the area, they showed three people climbing unharmed out of the safe storm shelters who’s houses had been completely demolished.
Walthall asked if the board would like to consider the proposed code change.
Myers moved to accept the proposed amendment to the licensing regulations in the City Code to create a Class L (Limited) contractor classification. Motion seconded by Riedemann. Motion passed 8-0 with Walthall abstaining.
Ezell, on behalf of the Building Code Board, moved to accept the same; motion was seconded by Wethington. Motion passed 4-0.
Walthall moved on to the next order of business to evaluate FlatSafe Tornado Shelters, LLC for a Class L license, based on the Board’s recommendation to accept the new contractor classification. He reminded the Board that the proposal must go before the City Commission for final acceptance and approval.
Riedemann asked if FlatSafe is waiting to start installing these shelters until the proposed change has been adopted by the City Commission. Walthall said that is correct; they are waiting for eligibility to pull permits. They still have to go through the step of actually applying for a license and being approved for that license. Walthall believes it would be appropriate to start a pre-approval evaluation for FlatSafe.
Caldwell asks what happens when another company applies for a Class L license. Walthall responded city staff would review the application based on the established criteria in place to meet eligibility. Caldwell asked if, based on what has been presented to the Board, FlatSafe has met most of those requirements. Walthall said they have not. They have not submitted a contractor licensing application yet, nor have they provided any proof of insurance or work experience. They have informally requested approval for a license based on their process through NSSA.
Myers asked if FlatSafe is out of Oklahoma. Walthall replied yes. Myers asked if they are licensed to operate in Oklahoma. Walthall said yes, they have provided proof they are in good standing with the Oklahoma Department of Commerce and have current business licenses. Myers asked if Oklahoma has a construction board for licensing. Walthall said it does not. Caldwell asked how, then, are they licensed in Oklahoma. Walthall responded it is by jurisdiction. Based on his understanding of the list of licenses FlatSafe provided that they possess, they are more of a business license than a contractor license.
Odgers asked what the process will be for the Board once the Class L license is in effect. Walthall said the licensing board would have to be convened to consider each application as they are submitted and reviewed by city staff for eligibility. The applicant will be responsible for convincing the Board they are qualified for their particular scope of work for which they are requesting a license. The Board will also set the insurance requirement, either $500,000 or $1,000,000 per occurrence for liability. That would be based on the scope of the work they are requesting and what the Board feels an appropriate level of insurance would be.
Rau asked if there has been a similar request for this type of license before. Walthall said this is the first request for an alternative license category.
Caldwell said if the Board is going to be called to review each application as it is presented, a representative from the applicant should be present at the meeting. There should be some basic information they are providing to the City before they get to the point of sitting before the Board. Walthall said he agrees.
Wethington said he believes the Board will find, as with the Oklahoma license, that the contractor is licensed to provide a product. He said the uphill battle city staff will have is determining if the installation of the product is compliant with City Code. The product may be certified, but the installation process is what is in question. Wethington said the question to be posed should be what kind of contractor is the applicant, and what qualifies the applicant to come in and build this type of shelter. Walthall said he agrees.
Caldwell asked if FlatSafe is applying for the license, or is the contractor. Walthall said they are one and the same. Stussie added this contractor offers one product and one installation method, which is in the garage using one of three different models as selected by the customer. Riedemann said other contractors could come in with different types of shelters they could purchase online and install; this is where the licensing can get complicated.
Rau referenced Jones’s comment earlier that the contractor may be qualified to install this specific product, but each situation is different. The contractor has no idea what the condition of the garage slab or the backfill underneath is.
Chaney said there could also be some concern regarding master versus journeyman workers on the site. He asked what we be the qualifying factors for the master qualifying party who is approved to pull the permit on behalf of the company when there are no qualifying tests for the master or journeyman to take. Jones asked if FlatSafe has different crews. He recommended the Board does not have a situation where the company has a license but the workers in the field are not qualified to be performing the work. Walthall said FlatSafe does have multiple crews, and they provide rigorous training for the workers. There is a crew leader that is fully trained to be qualified to complete the installation. The question of field crews versus qualifying individuals is not different for the Class L as compared to the Class A, B, C and D licenses. The City licenses the company, and the qualifying individual is responsible for all of the work done by the company.
Jones asked if there should be a minimum set of criteria the applicant must meet before the application is presented to the Board. Riedemann said possibly product specific licensing should be considered. As companies grow, they often sell their product to other companies for installation. The next contractor may not be as qualified to perform the install as FlatSafe. Caldwell said a process should be in place, regardless of how qualified the applicant is. Walthall said he agrees. He added experience is a common element to all of the licensing categories. His opinion would be if an applicant came forward and had no experience, they would not have good standing to obtain a license. Walthall feels the Board should be able to come up with some general criteria, but he believes the ordinance itself spells out those criteria for the Board. It is the Board’s job to determine what level of each component is required. Walthall said his concern is what certification the applicant will have, if it will qualify them for issuance of a license.
Caldwell said his argument in favor of the contractor on that point is the fact they have provided drawings that have been stamped by a licensed engineer. He feels that enables them to meet some of the criteria that perhaps other potential applicants might not be able to meet. Again, it is a question of the installation and not the product.
Stussie said he believed the FlatSafe representative would have been at the meeting had there been a licensing category in place in which they are a good fit.
Caldwell asked what staff would recommend as a minimum checklist for information FlatSafe would need to provide before they could present their case before the Board. Walthall said training, education, experience and insurance are the key components that need to be provided. He said the minimum experience would most likely be two years for any type of contractor license. He added he does not see a need for any other special information.
Schroeder said perhaps the Board should determine what they have the most concern about regarding this type of subgrade installation. A list could then be provided to FlatSafe so they are prepared to answer those questions should they come before the Board to present their case with regard to their eligibility for a license.
Rau said he thinks you would want an engineer to look at each individual project prior to cutting into the slab. Of concern would be what could potentially happen to the existing structure; the storm shelter itself is not in question.
Reardon asked what would be covered by the permit. Walthall said he has made that point with FlatSafe. Licensing is step one of the process, which evaluates the credentials of the company. The permitting stage looks at the job they are going to perform. It is the plan reviewer’s responsibility to look at the application and determine if everything needed has been submitted for the permit, or if there are questions about what was submitted. Once the permit is approved, it is the inspector’s responsibility to verify the work is being performed in compliance with City Code.
Walthall recommends requesting an application from FlatSafe and request any additional information that has not already been provided or that would not be provided with the standard application. Chaney asked about existing continuing education credits. Walthall said the Board could request that.
Caldwell said he is concerned about the lack of availability for continuing education opportunities for this type of contractor. Walthall said they will be required to provide proof of continuing education in order to renew their license. He said that would be a relevant question to ask FlatSafe, what they are going to do to meet that requirement. He said FEMA or NSSA may provide training with regard to their specific type of product.
Caldwell asked if the Board feels it needs to have FlatSafe come before them if they provide the necessary information when it comes to obtaining the license. Myers said he thinks they need to come before the Board. Rau agreed. Caldwell said that may need to be a stipulation in the process to have all Class L applicants come before the Board. Walthall agrees it is important to have a representative make a personal appearance.
Jones suggested a phone conference could be utilized if the application is submitted and it appears that the bulk of the information provided allows the applicant to meet the criteria for licensing. Caldwell said he feels the statement the applicant “may” have to come before the Board would be more appropriate.
Stussie asked if a permit is required for each separate installation. Walthall replied yes. Stussie said he suspected the first installation would get a lot of scrutiny and staff would be able to refine the process for future permits based on what is observed at the first installation. Walthall said that is an accurate statement. Stussie said he would be happy to be the volunteer for the first installation.
Caldwell asked if staff is now going to go back to FlatSafe and ask them to provide an application with the typical supporting documentation, which would then be provided to the Board for its consideration. Walthall said that is correct. Myers said a request for the applicant’s training procedures should be included.
Caldwell asked if there is anything else the Board should require for submittal of an application. Walthall asked the Board members what level of insurance they felt was appropriate. He recommended $500,000 per occurrence of liability insurance for this particular contractor. The Board members agreed that $500,000 coverage would be adequate.
Kruse moved that $500,000 per occurrence of general liability insurance be required for FlatSafe as part of its contractor license application. Motion was seconded by Chaney. Motion passed 8-0 with Walthall abstaining.
Adjournment
Caldwell moved to adjourn the meeting. Motion seconded by Walthall. Motion passed 9-0.
Ezell, on behalf of the Building Code Board, moved to adjourn the same; motion was seconded by Wethington. Motion passed 4-0.
Meeting adjourned at 12:59 p.m.