Loading...
3. Certificates of OccupancyCity of Kalispell Planning Department 17 - 2dStreet East, Suite 211, Kalispell, Montana. 59901 Telephone: (406) 751-1850 Fax: (406) 751-1858 Website: kalispellplanning.com REPORT TO: James H. Patrick, city Manager FROM: Thomas R. Jentz, Director SUBJECT: Certificate of Occupancy and Strom water Issues 1�►tE 0 G DATE: October 9, 2006 Council Work Session BACKGROUND: The city council at the April 14 workshop directed staff to pursue 4 separate courses of action in order to assist in bringing a long term solution to problems that have surfaced within the city associated with high ground water and storm water run --off in residential developments. Those 4 courses included: 1. Developing a policy, administered at the preliminary plat level, to determine, based on the presence of ground water, whether proposed lots are suitable for basements or crawl space development. 2. Require, as part of the building inspection program, an inspection for damp proofing/ foundation drains for all basements. 3. Require a certification by the builder/ homeowner that the final lot grades comply with the approved drainage plan for the subdivision. 4. Implement and enforce a certificate of occupancy component, as required by the city building codes program, to ensure that all residential and commercial construction and final lot grading conforms to city plans and specifications. Each of these 4 implementation strategies are outlined below: 1. Implement a program addressing the appropriate location for basements and crawl spaces in the city. City building codes already state that basements and crawl spaces are only allowed in areas of well drained soils. This condition is not being rigorously enforced as historically data is not readily available documenting well drained soils. The proper time to implement this conditions is at the preliminary plat stage when a developer is initially proposing development in an area. Therefore it is recommended that the subdivision regulations should be amended to require that a standard condition of preliminary plat approval should be the provision of scientific data (ground water monitoring through a season i.e. February - June, soils information, well log info., etc.) to document where seasonal high ground water levels are within the proposed subdivision. Where seasonal high ground water is below 10 feet, basements and crawl spaces would be alloyed. where ground water is between 5 --- 10 feet, basement construction would be prohibited and a note would be placed on the face of the final plat. where ground water is at 5 feet or less, crawl space development would be prohibited and a note would be placed on the face of the final plat. If the developer does not want to undertake provision of ground water data, a note would be placed on the face of the final plat that this development has not been reviewed or approved for basement or crawl space development. Where such a prohibition has been placed on the plat because a developer did not provide the information, individual homeowners could still do basement or crawl space development if they individually showed that seasonal high ground crater was below the standards set. Required Action: City council should direct staff to amend the subdivision regulations and include a section requiring the provision of ground water information assuring that the development is suitable for either or both basement or crawl space development. The city subdivision regulations would be amended with the insertion of the following text: 3.23 Ground water affecting basements and crawl. spaces. A. The subdivider shall provide adequate information documenting the presence or depth of seasonal high ground water for the proposed subdivision. Acceptable information would include actual ground crater monitoring information on site through the seasonal high ground water period (maid March -- end of June) , soils information indicating the presence of saturated or modeled soils, well log info., etc. 1. where seasonal high ground water is below 10 feet, basements and crawl spaces would be allowed. 2. where ground crater is between 5 - 10 feet, basement construction would be prohibited and a note would be placed on the face of the final plat. 3. where ground crater is at 5 feet or less, crawl space development would be prohibited and a note would be placed on the face of the final plat. 4. If the developer does not want to undertake provision of ground crater data, a note would be placed on the face of the final plat that this development has not been reviewed or approved for basement or crawl space development. i. In such a case, where individual homeowners do want to utilize basement or crawl space development, they would will be required to document that the presence of seasonal high ground grater complies with criteria 1 - 3 above. 2 2. Implement a separate building inspection for foundation drains and damp proofing of basement walls. The following inspections are currently undertaken on residences within the city during their construction phase: footings, framing, sheetrock, insulation., mechanical (heating/air), plumbing, electrical (conducted by a state inspector) and a final inspection. The city adopted an RBC (Residential Building Code) that requires that foundation walls of finished basements be damp proofed (usually with an exterior, surface asphalt application) . In addition, the RBC requires that finished basements have a perimeter floor drain. The department currently attaches a typical design for the footing drain with each new residential building permit but does conduct an individual inspection to determine if such work is adequately installed. Building staff would add this inspection as part of their regular inspection cycle for all basement construction, whether it is finished or unfurnished. Required Action: a. Policy direction from the city council to add inspection of damp proofing of all basement walls and the proper installation of all footing/foundation drains as part of all residential/commercial basement projects. b. Direction from Public Works as to the list of appropriate locations to send/pump the water collected by the floor drain. 3, require all lots to conform to the approved drainage plan as submitted at final plat. Drainage plans are prepared by the developer's engineer and reviewed by the Kalispell Public Works Department for all new subdivisions. The drainage plans are predicated on a defined landscape. When home builders begin developing individual lots, often times the topography is significantly modified to fit the needs / desire of the new home layout, sometimes there is excess dirt to get rid of from the foundation excavation and it is spilled and shaped on site, and sometimes the lot is re -shaped through ignorance or convenience. Modifying the lot topography significantly and / or failing to account for drainage from the foundation will modify, possibly adversely, the drainage flows and volumes that the drainage plan was based on. The city building codes require the following: "Surface drainage shall be diverted to a storm sewer conveyance or other approved point of collection so as to not create a hazard. Lots shall be graded so as to drain surface crater away from foundation walls. The grade away from the foundation walls shall fall a minimum. of 6 inches within the first 10 feet." The city building inspectors typically look for this at the time of foundation work. Two problems develop. By the time the house is completed and landscaped, the topography may be vastly changed. Secondly, the builders consistently do not call for a certificate of occupancy prior to inhabiting or selling the residence and the city does not 3 enforce the C/O requirement. Thus the city inspectors have no knowledge nor enforcement mechanism to insure lot drainage is appropriate. Required Action: a. A certification from the builder/owner that specifies grades from the approved drainage plan have been met. This may require a surveyor at some point. b. A willingness on the part of the city to enforce these requirements 4. Implement and enforce a certificate of occupancy component, as required by the city building codes program, to ensure that all residential and commercial construction and final lot grading conforms to city plans and specifications. The city as a whole does a good job of reviewing plans submitted for building permits and inspecting certain aspect of projects while they are under construction. However, once a project nears completion, there really is not an effective method currently to ensure that it is completed properly. For example, a new homeowner will want to move in as soon as possible and the smoke detectors may not be installed, or a new business starts stocking the shelves and their focus shifts from finishing construction to getting the business operating. In those situations, contractors often fail to call for final inspections. If they do, the result is frequently simply a punch list that does not get completed. Last fall, the Building Department tried a new procedure in an effort to close the loop on just commercial projects. When a Certificate of Occupancy is requested, the Building Department sends a notice to Public Works, Parks, Zoning and the Fire Department. The notice provides each department with 5 working days to inspect the site and respond with an approval or disapproval of the C/O. Once each department has resolved any issues with the developer, the Building Department will issue the C/O. In certain instances, such as winter weather preventing landscaping or paving, a performance bond or other security can be posted. While this process has improved the situation, it has not always led to compliance and it only has been imposed on commercial projects. This lack of a formal certificate of occupancy program for the building department has been noted in the recent ISO rating program undertaken this spring. The city Building Department rating dropped from a previous high 3 to a 5 with the rating team noting several deficiencies, one being the lack of a required C / O program for new construction. The City was given one year to improve its performance before the new grade would take effect. The building department staff has looped at several options for insuring enforcement for a C/O across the board. These measures include: 4 1. Voluntary encouragement. This has not worked to date. 2. Issuing a restricted flow water meter. Such a meter would allow a contractor grater to test plumbing and to address minimal construction water needs but would not be adequate to provide domestic or commercial flows. The restriction would then be removed at the time of C/O concerns including not being able to find a decent flow restrictor, the cost of removing the restriction (city staff time) and the possibility that the homeowner contractor would just remove the restrictor on their own. 3. Threatening to turn the water off if they do not get a C/O in a timely fashion. The dilemma here is that the structure would typically already be occupied and it is difficult politically to enforce turning off someone's water. 4. Not issuing a water meter until /o has been issued. This appears to be the most consistent and enforceable solution. The Building Department, in contacting local builders has determined that it only takes 5 -- 10 gallons of water (clean up for painters and sheet rockers) to build a house. water lines are air tested. Contactors carry their own crater to projects under construction., especially in the winter. Portable bathrooms are brought on site already. Not receiving the water meter until C / D is issues is a powerful motivator to finish a project. Required Action: Direct Public works to not issue a water meter until the Building Department has issued a final C/O. Note the following limitations and concerns. a. The issuance of the C / o would be linked to health safety issues. If sidewalks, landscaping, etc. are not in or if rock was inadvertently placed in the boulevard and could not be removed because of seasonal limitations, the contractor could bond for the work to be completed in the spring. b. Initially this program would not work within the Evergreen water District. If the council so desires, staff would proceed and talk to the Evergreen water District and work on an agreement supporting this policy. c. The policy would not work for remodel projects unless they were significant in scale and required a new water service. LETTERS/ 2006/ storm water issues 4-13. 5