Laserfiche WebLink
r , <br />BOARD OF BUILDING CODE APPFALS MARCH 23, 1989 <br />PAGE 2 <br />that..would include.all such cases, apartment buildings and condominiums <br />could have individual heating units with duat work which wonld take • <br />a lot of inspection time. Mr. Kazak pointed out that each unit is in an <br />individual room and an inspector would have to check each unit so he <br />cannot see these being figured as one unit, however he did have a problem <br />with the double charge'for one unit. Mr. Conway stated that in most <br />instances where there is one unit there is a separate condensor, remote <br />to the main unit. In response to Mr. Konold's questions, Mr. Conway <br />advised that the fees on the Hampton Inn job were figured on the same <br />formula and that Mr. Soni was a contractor on that job, but-with.a <br />different compariy., Mr. Soni advised that the other company did not follow <br />through with their objections to the permit fees. He further explained <br />that they f igure the permit fees at 1% of the cost of the job, they do <br />not ca11 and get an exact permit fee.for each job. The member agreed <br />that most contractors find out the permit costs from the city before they <br />bid a job. P4r. Soni advised that they had paid the permit fee of $7,000.00, <br />but they are asking the Board to. reconsider these fees. Mr. Conway stated <br />that he had a problem with altering a fee after several other contractors <br />had been advised by the Building Department what those fees were and they, <br />in turn, had figured those costs into their bid, he had no objection to <br />the Board reviewing the fee schedule in the future. Mr. Schulz stated <br />that for an inspector to go out on each inspection for only $20.00 does <br />not seem reasonable, B. Schulz moved that as long as a list was devel- <br />oped for this job and various contractors have called in and got these <br />fees, that the Board has no alternative than to let this stand, otherwise <br />they would be doing a disservice to the other contractors, seconded by <br />J. Kazak, and unanimously approved. Mr, Soni stated that he would call <br />the Building Department for the fees on every job they bid and would <br />advise the Board when they did not have the fees available for him. Mr. <br />Kazak also suggested that he obtain a copy of the changes that Westlake <br />has made, <br />V. OLD BUSINESS: <br />Elections will be postponed until all members are present, <br />VI. NEW BUSINESS: <br />Mr. Schulz would like the new members to receive briefcases and advised that <br />when he was on the Board all members had a case which was to contain only the <br />information for the Board. <br />Mr. Conway advised that the 1989 CABO One and Two Family Dwelling Code will <br />not be available until April. <br />In reference to the case heard this evening, Mr. Kazak stated that he did have <br />a problem with chargin two fees for one unit and would like the Board to <br />address this "later. <br />Discussion regarding licensing of an individual when employed by more than <br />one general contractor. (Section 1317.01). <br />Mr. Conway advised that he is br.ing this to the Board since.there is a person <br />who is acting as a superintendent for two, possibly three contractors, and it <br />is his belief that this person is more than an employee, and should be considered