PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR RICK DVORAK AND ASSISTANT PLANNING AND ZONING ADMINISTRATOR R.J. MOORE: UPDATE WITH BOB BARKER, SAND & GRAVEL REGARDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CU9706; UPDATE ON SENSITIVE AREAS ORDINANCE; AND possible ADOPTION OF A BUILDING CODE FOR RURAL JOHNSON COUNTY (Continued)
Reconvened at 10:08 a.m.
Bolkcom: We're back. Doughnuts have been served everybody's had their coffee and we're ready to roll. We are down on item number 3. Business from Planning and Zoning Administrator.
Stutsman: You should acknowledge who brought the doughnuts.
Bolkcom: Cole Chase brought the doughnuts.
Jordahl: Yeah, Cole.
Iowa City Area Chamber of Commerce Representative Cole Chase: Actually it was the North Liberty Commerce Committee.
Bolkcom: Thank you North Liberty.
Jordahl: Thank you North Liberty Commerce Committee.
Bolkcom: Glenn, thank you for those.
Chase: You can't have more than 6 today, because they're (inaudible) cents apiece.
Bolkcom: So there's no relation to the Sensitive Areas Ordinance.
Chase: None what so ever.
Bolkcom: Or the building code. We're down to item number C, discussion regarding the adoption of a building code for rural Johnson County. Good morning everybody.
Dvorak: This morning I have Jim Martinek, Glenn Siders, and Larry Lee representing the Iowa City Homebuilders Association discuss my proposal with you. As a brief overview of what I've given you, the intent of this is to not walk in here and say, Johnson County Planning and Zoning wants a building code for Johnson County. You can't coming here this morning... We've had a lot of inquiry questions, we've had lots of problems in the County. So, what I'm proposing is that the Board appoints a study committee of people in the building trades, rural residents, people in residential sub-divisions, possibly building inspectors from one of the municipalities and do some hard work and actually come up with a proposal to determine even if we need a building code, and what building codes to adopt, how to implement it, how to come up with finances. Basically the charge is create if they decide the necessity of it, to create a building code department. On that, that's why I have Jim here and Glenn and Larry. I'd like Glenn to go ahead and make some comments if he would because he does have an appointment in Coralville...
Bolkcom: OK.
Dvorak: ...he'd like to attend. So, if it's OK with Joe.
Bolkcom: Very good. (Inaudible)
Siders: Thank you. For the record, my name's Glenn Siders. First entered into some conversation with Rick about a year ago, I guess, maybe be a little less. Rick did mention that the Homebuilders has endorsed a building code, that's not exactly correct. We have issued a letter and had many conversations with Rick. I don't know that the Homebuilders would be opposed to a building code in the county, assuming you had the correct enforcement procedures and everything like that. Right now, we have endorsed looking into the possibility of a building code. And I think RJ has outlined with the memorandum is right on track. I don't know that I can defute anything that he said. We certainly encourage looking into a building code. There's going to be a couple of 3 key issues that will need to be dealt with, the level of enforcement, what you're going to regulate, be it commercial, residential, both, new, existing, so on, fee structure. A real key component is enforcement. I think it would probably be our position that a building code's not worth a hoot if you don't have enforcement. We wouldn't be favorable to endorsing a building code as just a revenue gainer for the County. It doesn't benefit anybody, it hinders, usually everybody. But there are a number of people in our membership that feel that there is an enforcement program or some additional regulation that needs to happen in the county. Most of the reputable builders will build a home in the county the same as they do in the city. But there are some people that build primarily in the county, don't build in the municipalities and do cut some corners, that we don't appreciate as members of the Homebuilders. So, we would very much encourage the Board to consider collating a group of people. I know Linn County has a very very active enforcement program. Possibly too active from the rumors on the street. I know that we have conversed with some of those people. They would be very open to providing input to what Johnson County wants to do. But the Homebuilders Association very much support looking into the possibility of a building code and would welcome the opportunity to participate in the development of that code and research.
Jordahl: Glad to hear that.
Stutsman: So basically, what you're asking is to develop a study committee to look into...
Dvorak: Exactly.
Stutsman: ...this proposal.
Lacina: So, is it the intent of the Board to have Rick or Glenn or Jim give us a letter saying here's were I recommend we get people from these areas. So we have somebody from the health area, somebody...
Dvorak: I've kind of got a brief outline here if we ant to do this on a formal basis. We can re-review my proposal maybe informally again or as I said in a formal meeting. I have kind of highlighted some of the specific areas I would like to see as study committee, participants on a study committee. You can add to or move from. Initially, get the information out to the public, have people submit applications, similar to what we've done in the other study committees that we have in place now. The Board then would then be on that study committee.
Stutsman: So you're talking about the architects, engineers, rural residence farmers...
Dvorak: I just threw some things in there that I thought might be good general good people. We (inaudible) have a farmer and rural resident to get all perspectives. You may not like that or may not agree with that, but that's how I'm proposing it.
Jordahl: To include labor in that mix.
Siders: One thing I think would be very important and would assist this committee and possibly save a lot of time is that the Board has some definite feelings, for example agriculture should be accepted, period. The Board wanted to make that statement, that committee should know, because that's going to have a significant impact on how functional this...
Lacina: By law, I think it is exempt.
Siders: ...they need to know some of those things. I don't what the law reads, and I don't know if the dwelling is exempted or just ag buildings or both either one. I know there's ag sections in building codes. There may be some legal questions you need to deal with. But if there's any policy statements the Board wants to make and exempt any groups, or say I definitely don't...
Jim Martinek: It's going to have an impact going top get revenue is it worth investing a lot of your time and so on so forth.
Dvorak: My understanding from Linn County is because of the ag exemption in the state code under zoning all ag buildings including residences are exempt.
Lacina: But we do walk a fine line don't we when they fall under the 40 acre or they come in for the bank requirement of the platting of the 5 acres to build on a farms site.
Stutsman: That's not considered ag building, is it?
Lacina: Right. So at that point... What I'm saying is you can have 2 houses side by side both on 160 acres, and if the lender requires a (inaudible) require, 5,000 acres. But if the lender requires a plat on that property, they're going to fall under these codes.
Dvorak: I think going back to what Glenn said, that would have to be identified. We'd have to specifically say.
Lacina: Now, on the other side, if it is platted off, then realistically it can be sold off as a residency at that point.
Dvorak: Triggers.
Lacina: Well, maybe not triggers, but we would have rational reason why it should conform to the construction codes.
Stutsman: Quite frankly, I'm wondering if it shouldn't.
Bolkcom: Yes, I don't see why we wouldn't want to have a house built here not be under code and be built shoddily and one-half mile away the under the code. The homeowner seems to me would have some interest in having some assurances.
Stutsman: I guess even the bank I think would want it. Making sure that they got...
Bolkcom: Jim, do you have some comments you'd like to share at this point, before we...
Martinek: Well, I guess I'm probably here as an interested homeowner I would encourage the Board to enact a building code to protect the citizens in the County (inaudible) .
Lacina: When you do hear the horror stories... One of the Sups up in Linn County told me about the $40,000 handicap accessible restroom in the horsebarn. So we don't want to go to the extreme where it is a burden because they somebody come in to ride the horse. But at the same time, we also don't want somebody coming in bidding a house and not having adequate wiring...
Siders: I think it's going to be very important for this committee to bring those awarenesses to your attention because you don't have options on some of that. Handicap accessibility's a state law. You don't have to do it if not regulated by building code, but it's like bathrooms, if you don't provide a bathroom sometimes you're not, nobody says you have to, but if you put one in, by God, you've got to build it this way and this way and this way, and you got to make it happen. (Inaudible) ...and I think it's important that this committee passes along what the County might be getting into and make you aware of that. I mean you're not going to have the option to pick and choose on a lot of issues.
Bolkcom: So is the goal of the committee to decide whether we're going to have a building code or not, or is the goal of the committee to develop a draft of a building code and those seem to be 2 different things to me. Because if we're going to have a committee to give the Board some feedback on whether we ought to have a building code, it seems to me we need to have for it and against it on the committee.
Martinek: I don't know that anybody's for or against right now, Joe. I don't know how you can do that until you look into some things. As far as drafting a code, there's dozens of model codes available.
Bolkcom: Just adopt one.
Martinek: You can make local amendments to these model codes to adjust certain needs. I see the committee... it's my understanding (inaudible) talk with Rick, to evaluate whether or not it warrants the County to get into a code enforcement program.
Stutsman: Spell out the pros and the cons. Things that we have to have in place if we are going to do this.
Martinek: I think that would be critical, yes.
Lacina: For example: who, what, when, where. We might decide that a real intense area may be that North Corridor. It's going to be like a municipality...
Martinek: I could easily see the committee saying something to the effect that the... Well for the X percentage of homes being built... and we're guessing this is the kind of revenue you can get for a permit and it's feasible or not feasible financially to establish an enforcement committee, dependent on the focus of what you want to regulate.
Stutsman: Well, it sounds real good that a committee would do all that background work and then present that to the Board.
Martinek: I really don't know why they couldn't do a majority, I don't know if they can do all of it, but I don't know why they couldn't do a majority of it.
Jordahl: It seems to be reasonable that this mechanism could be made self-funding. If the person is going to the expense of putting up a house and we're helping to guarantee to the citizens that the house they put up is going to be of a certain standard, that would be part of the cost of putting the house up.
Siders: Most building departments are self-funding. They fund themselves, they actually generate revenue to help offset other line-item costs in the general budget, or whatever. I'm not comfortable saying that and the County not knowing what level of enforcement might be appropriate for this County.
Stutsman: But I think those are the kinds of questions that I would hope that this committee...
Siders: This committee needs to analyze those and get that information back to you.
Lacina: Along with the affordability issue and if...
Siders: Exactly.
Lacina: ...it ag prices were depressed and down the road we're looking at really hardships, it might be that it become 90% self-funded...
Siders: You need to look at fee structures. I'm not sure politically... for example, if you want to build a garage. Let's say you're building a larger garage that has a little shop in it, its valued at $25,000. If you go by the textbook permit fee, you're looking at $400 permit fee. I not sure Johnson County's ready to step in and tell some farmer he's got to pay $400 to put up a garage.
Martinek: We just addressed this issue in Solon, we just adopted codes not long ago. There's an exemption for those kind of structures. You know, so it doesn't impact them.
Siders: That's just part of the things that need to be talked about. That's not top say that you couldn't come up with you're own fee structure and still make a building department self-sustaining.
Dvorak: I have talked with Linn County, Cedar Rapids, Iowa City, Coralville... Jim and I have talked all these different areas are very willing to support this study and will participate doing presentations, financial breakdowns, whatever we need. They would be glad to send representatives if the study committee wants input from existing operating building departments in this regional area, so we are consistent. My goal is to be consistent. I'd be afraid of coming up with something that's totally opposite of what somebody else has. There's a lot of nuances to that. Licensing, and so on and so forth. But I think I'm still just asking the support of the Board to at least have the study committee put in place.
Stutsman: I think it sounds like a good idea and I'm ready to move on the next step. When I look over this list of people... you have electricians but you don't have plumbers... Is there some reason why there's not...
Dvorak: I didn't know how to spell plumbers.
Stutsman: I don't know how the rest of the Board feels. I think there's something we've talked about a lot. I guess I'm ready to get some of these questions on table and answered so that we can decide whether we want to do this or not for the County.
Duffy: I would like to say something there that... going on the Parade of Homes for several years... We're lucky we have a great group of contractors and carpenters and things like that. This is not an emergency situation with me, but now and them you might get somebody that might try to cheapen up a house or don't know what they should do and leave, that's different. Glen, I was going to ask, there's a suggested state code... because I've read it
Siders: There is an Iowa State Code..
Duffy: Is that $25 a year... Don't some of the people in this business... I thought every year it was a $25 fee...
Dvorak: There's a registration fee.
Duffy: Registration fee, or something.
Siders: Actually, a lot of people refer to it as a licensing fee. It's not a licensing fee. It's a registration fee. $25, it used to be every other year. I think they just amended the law to say $25 a year know. The only thing that does is give the Department of Labor a list to look at to make sure that you're registered so they can come down and find you if you aren't. It really doesn't do anything with the qualifications of your job performance whatsoever. It's not a license.
Duffy: I just wondered what it was. Registration, OK.
Bolkcom: So, how do we proceed. We advertise for possible to join this study committee...
Dvorak: I'd like to...
Bolkcom: ...in various categories.
Dvorak: ...work on giving some type of proposal to the Board that they could put on I guess formally, or informally if we can. And just send it out to the public and see what kind of response. Using this as a kind of tool, or a guide anyway for a direction. I don't know if we need formal action or if I can just start doing it.
Lacina: I would think clearly state what the purpose of the committee, which is I'm hearing is fact-finding, information gathering. But succinctly put that in a statement, and then I would think we would go ahead and advertise and get some people to get involved in it. They're not empowered to make a decision...
Dvorak: Recommendation.
Duffy: Research and recommendation.
Jordahl: Yes, I mean they're recommending... They're recommendation, however, may very well be similar to the form of an ordinance that we ultimately approve, too. I don't want to say that the committee is some weakling organization. Just as the Sensitive Areas we were discussing earlier, doing detailed work.
Stutsman: I guess I'd rather have it, to begin with, more focused. That they're just going to present the pros and cons, and just do a study of a building code. Then maybe the next step would be to get it more actually drafting the ordinance.
Bolkcom: Because I think there are some people, believe it or not, that are going to be strongly opposed to this. We need to hear from them the context (inaudible) this research. Cole.
Chase: In terms of the timing for this, I would also encourage you to state implicitly the time guidelines for this, because drawing experience from our local builders you should probably time it so that it's not during the building season. You get a better more reliable commitment from them if its...
Stutsman: Boy this is perfect timing then to put it in place right now.
Bolkcom: Next month, or something, (inaudible).
Dvorak: I guess finally, I know you want to conclude this. I don't want to spend a lot of time and these people a lot of time if the Board's not interested in a building code. I think that's the final issue. If there is support to do this, dopes the Board support the idea of a building code for Johnson County?
Bolkcom: It's a good question. I don't think we'd appoint a committee unless there was some serious interest to investigate and look into doing it. I'm not interested in wasting our staff's time or anybody else's time on it.
Jordahl: I really appreciate your leadership on this Rick. You've been talking to a number of people and kind of cultivating an understanding of who people feel out there and looking at who's interested and stuff. And I think that's just a marvelous piece of just the kind of work I've seen you do, to be sort of personal. And come out and pull something together without a lot of controversy. It is something I'm very much supportive of.
Stutsman: I was just looking at this list if we wanted to expand on this list or just have this as a general idea, and have Rick work on that and then bring a number?
Dvorak: We could, if it's OK with the Board, some of the members that are here today, we could come up with a final...
Martinek: I think we could come up with a comprehensive list for you to look at.
Dvorak: Of categories.
Stutsman: OK. And then we'll just do the application processing, keep it moving and go from there.
Dvorak: Very good.
Siders: Thank you.
Bolkcom: Thanks for coming in. Appreciate it. Thank you Rick.