Travis County Commissioners Court
January 5, 2010,
Item 5
Number 5.
consider and take appropriate action regarding an order of the Travis County Commissioners court amending the Travis County code, chapter 71 fire code.
>> good morning, judge, Commissioners, I'm danny hobby, the executive manager of emergency services.
with me today to my left is the Travis County fire marshal, herschell illegal immigrant what we have done is sent you some information regarding the revision and adjustments to our fee schedule regarding the fire code.
as I mentioned to you several weeks ago, when we were here for another matter related to the fire code, we adopted our fire code on February the 1st, 2005.
and since that period of time, we have now had an opportunity to experience some of the operational developments and -- in regards to the issuance of this fire code and what it takes to do it and so as a result of that, we now feel that it's necessary for us to revisit this schedule of fees, which we're entitled to under the fire code.
however, the -- the receiving of fees is only to cover costs.
we're not here to generate revenue.
we're not here to make a profit.
we're here to just implement the fire code and as a result we need to recover the costs to do that implementation.
so in the fire code, there are issuance of permits and collection of fees.
that has to do with, I'm giving you a notebook, when breaks it down into basically three categories, that's building and construction permits, inspection fees and what we call operational permits.
so what I would like to do is allow herschel to just highlight some of the revisions that we would like to make and ask you to consider in this order.
i will turn it over to herschel.
>> thank you, sir.
with the adoption of the code in 2005, it was entirely new to Travis County in the collection of fees was something that was new and over the last four years, we have discovered some areas that were not exactly planned for or some things that probably were just thought to be understood and in reality they probably needed to be addressed a little bit differently.
one of the first things that I'm asking you to consider is -- is adding a building valuation table into the building fees.
we have had a number of people that would come to us and say, "well, I can build this building for $3 a square foot." when in reality, we know that's not exactly right.
but when they ask for what should I base it on, we didn't have anything in particular that's set aside.
i chose the 2003 building valuation table after considering and measuring it against some of the buildings that came to us where I knew the people would have gone out for -- for bid, competitive bid.
and those -- the closest thing to that, some just over, some just under, was the 2003 building valuation table.
i think that's pretty close for central Texas at this time.
the 2009 building valuation table is almost 25% higher than a 2003 table and it's just -- doesn't actually reflect costs for construction in Travis County.
that's -- that's -- valuation table is something that is used on an international basis and can be adjusted by each jurisdiction as they choose.
so the addition of that table is one of the primary things that I'm asking for.
another thing is under the building permits is the special projects.
we've had a number of people come to us and say, well, I'm building a large open air pavilion and there are -- the exiting issues, the firewall issues, those type of things are not issues, do not require inspection time or review time.
and so if we -- without having a special type permit, we base this on a -- the building valuation table, then we do not -- we actually wind up charging a lot more in fees than we use up in time to inspect those facilities.
another example of that is a marina.
there's not a lot of review and there's only the final inspection.
is all that it takes for us.
so there are no fire walls and things like that to inspect.
so we need a special permit fee in there so that we can charge a set amount to cover our administrative costs and then we will build them by the hour for what it takes us to do inspections.
i believe that is a -- that is going to be appropriate.
i've added a couple of other fees and the proposed buildings and this -- these things that are new, the special project, in particular site plans.
people come to us with site plans and ask us to review these and then -- then we spend three or four hours on them and we never hear from them again.
we have our time and our software record keeping all tied up.
so we need something to help us recover that cost.
for instance, residential subdivisions.
we do look at the streets and the hydrant placements and things like that, but we have no authority over the buildings that actually go into those, but we do review those streets and hydrant placements for people.
>> do you have authority over them.
>> sir.
>> do you have regulatory over streets and hydrants?
>> yes, sir, the fire code gives us authority from access roads and goes on to define that access road as the road from the fire station to the -- any building in the county.
so -- but when we review them, that's all we review for residential type of subdivision.
a couple of other is request we've asked for new fees, the old fee schedule had one fee for a fire sprinkler system.
and we have since learned by experience that sometimes our sprinkler systems include a fire pump, a separate contractor for underground lines, private water supplies, and under the old fee schedule it was $260 for a fire sprinkler system.
now, that could include a 65 million-dollar, seven building, multi-story project and we would spend day goes and days on those -- days and days on those inspections.
and I have broken this down to ask for fire sprinkler permits based upon the number of risers in the fire sprinkler system system.
just inspecting a fire pump alone takes two hours.
and the hydro of the underground is a completely different section and it takes two hours just to inspect that and witness the hydro test on it.
so these fees that I have added in will not be large revenue generators for us, but they will assist us in covering our costs in doing the inspections.
the -- the actual inspection fees, I don't believe I changed anything in there other than to clarify some n some area that's if I'm going to have to do a reinspection or something like that, that I'm going to include my travel time to and from that inspection site in those fees to assist in recovering those costs.
operational permits.
the difference in operational permits is basically the public firework display permit.
it is just about going to double.
because when we review a permit, we have to go and look at the site to see if it's appropriate.
then after the -- after the pyro technician sets up his display we have to make sure that it's set up appropriatesly.
we spend about four or five hours on that and sometimes wind up having to have an inspector on site during a display.
so the proposed change here will allow us to recover our costs for a public firework display.
special events, basically, we just went to -- want to state that there's going to be a five hour minimum any time we are reviewing plans for something like a mass gathering.
i will be glad to answer any questions the court may have.
>> I just have a couple of 'em.
i think you have done a real good job here.
i -- I'm kind of concerned basically I guess as far as notification of what we're doing here.
how will the persons that will be affected by what we're doing here today, how will they be notified?
i mean there's a lot going on.
how does that process work, can you explain that to me?
>> the current fee schedule and application process is posted on our website.
>> all right.
>> and when we change this, that's -- I plan to post it, update our website, the county's website to reflect that these are the changes that we proposed.
>> okay.
so for the viewing public, could you give me what -- could you tell me what that is?
because there may be someone doing something out there if the court decides to approve this, I guess when it will go into effect all of these other kind of things, I guess my question is when will that be -- how will they be able to get to that website?
do you have a website name or something like that that the folks can kind of hone into, look at what's now and what's actually if the court end up amending this, then what it will be then.
so -- would you -- mind giving us that information.
>> yes, sir.
the current -- current fees and process are posted on a website.
these proposed are not on the website.
>> exactly.
>> but we can put those up there if the court would like us to do that.
and there is a link off the Travis County government website, through the departments, which will allow you to link to the fire marshal's office.
it would be the easiest way to explain how to get to it.
go from the Travis County website to the departments, fire marshal is listed as one of those departments.
once you are on our site there will be a link to the process.
>> okay.
i wanted to note how you navigate to get to the information that a person would be really, you know, have an interest in looking at.
so thank for you that answer.
if the court decides to support the new modification for the amending of this, when will that actually go into effect?
>> Commissioner, I believe that I would just recommend that be the discretion of the court, whenever you say --
>> bylaw I guess -- I guess by law is there a time line that we need to look at, in other words, within this many days or that many days?
i really don't know what governs -- what governs the change as far as implementation.
if the court decides to support these changes as far as recovery costs that you desperately need to I guess embrace in this -- in this regard.
so I guess, legal, is there any --
>>
>> [indiscernible]
>> Commissioner, barbara is not here at this particular moment.
so I guess she would need to answer that question.
my understanding, though, is that again, though, we need to get her interpretation, that this is an amendment to the existing code, therefore it would go into effect when you approved it.
>> that is the legal answer.
>> no, sir, I'm not an attorney.
that's my answer.
>> I wasn't trying to put an attorney's hat on you there.
>> [laughter]
>> I will be quiet, Commissioner.
>> all right.
>> believe me, I wasn't trying to put the attorney's hat on you.
i was just trying to see whatever action the court takes today, I was trying to determine what -- what under the legal framework, how would that be -- the effective date, when would it actually go into effect.
from the legal side.
>> we'll get an answer for you.
>> all right, thank you, that's it.
>> Commissioner Eckhardt.
>> I have just a request with regard to this being a change of code, and regard to the upload, it would be good to be working with the county attorney's office and its and our library in their efforts to make all of our new code provisions searchable in one location.
and my understanding is that all of the county fees do exist in one portion of the code.
there's the fire code, but then also it's repeated in another portion of the code that has a complete listing as an amendment of all of the fees that the county charges.
so that could be just -- just a little more user friendly.
>> questions from the court?
my personal question is that we postpone action for two weeks.
i think we ought to give to the public whatever notice we can.
when we are in a rule making process, what notice do we give residents?
marietta, does that answer come to mind?
whatever that process is, let's follow it.
>> ordinarily, if there's something in the statute that requires it, we go by that.
if not, I think this court has set a public hearing and option, time for review.
>> some folk are watching this today, they may have questions, they may have concerns.
but I think we ought to have it back on the court's agenda in two weeks.
>> two weeks, judge?
>> yes, sir, that would be my recommendation.
>> yes.
>> a week would be a little too fast, I think, two weeks would be all right.
if there are not concerns then, we would -- I think we ought to set an effective date.
a good one to me would be February 15th.
so if we act around the 20th or so, that will give us roughly three weeks.
three or four weeks.
now, so who puts together this building valuation table?
>> that -- that table is created by international code council.
they publish the international code family, which includes the international building code, plumbing code, mechanical gas code, electrical code.
that building valuation table is -- it comes from them, it's a publication from them.
it's available on their website.
>> it's used by governmental entities here in central Texas.
>> I don't know that anyone else that's using this particular international fire code alone is using that.
but it would be typical for people that are using the entire code family.
it's a standard that is set and I have seen it used in a number of other cities.
>> those in the building business, who are used to having fire inspections, getting permits from the fire marshal's office are familiar with the valuation code?
>> people that are typically used to using the international code in any of their process, in reference as far as architects and things like that, would be familiar that it exists.
now, I would think that people such as -- what we see mainly as schools and large commercial buildings where things go out for bid.
the bid may come in just above or just below that building valuation table.
but it is just a standard that's set for a -- for a government entity to use as a measuring point.
>> okay.
has the Travis County fire marshal's office used it since 2003?
>> since -- we -- when we adopted the 2003 code in 2005, the times that we have used it would be when someone would come in with a -- with an estimate, a 10,000 square foot warehouse that they are going to build for $9,000 and we would say -- the national standard for this is something in the neighborhood of $100 a square foot, how can you build it for nine?
and then when they go and get their individual bids and put them together, they will come up with something that's very close to that building valuation table.
but by saying they only build it for nine, their permit fee is less.
>> but if they have specific documentation, that will show their cost, we use that table.
>> we have used that in the past when someone would come to us with something that is just extremely low and say, okay, instead of considering a building valuation table as a standard, if you can show me that's what your bids are, then we will consider that.
>> okay.
so it looks like we're going to an hourly charge.
in most cases.
>> in some of those areas, the -- the hourly charge is just to ensure that we cover our costs and the --
>> some of them there's a minimum charge.
>> there is a minimum charge.
like --
>> plus an hourly fee.
>> an hourly, yes, sir.
>> an hourly fee but with a minimum charge.
>> that is correct on some of them, yes, sir.
>> so what's the rationale for that?
once we have a --
>> once we have the inspection fees, permit fees are set up with the intention that when you build something, and you call us for an inspection, we're there to verify that it does pass.
>> okay.
>> okay?
but if it doesn't pass and we go back four or five or six times, then we are above and beyond what -- what the permit fee covered.
and so at that point and even in the original fee schedule there was a reinspection fee that was set at $52 an hour.
this basically, I'm putting it in with each one of the different areas to clarify to the people --
>> but the hourly fee protects us on the long.
>> it does on the long end.
>> when we spend a lot more time than usual.
>> that's correct.
>> the hourly fee is there.
but I guess if I have dotted my I's and crossed my t's, instead of taking the fire marshal's office four hours it takes two, why would I be penalized by the minimum fee of four hours?
you see what I'm saying?
>> I --
>> if you spend five hours we're protected.
your fee is five times x amount of money.
but in some of these there's like a four hour minimum fee.
my question is if it only takes two hours for us to do it, why isn't the fee the rate times two?
i guess I'm not sure exactly which one that you are talking about, in particular the special event fee has a five hour minimum, that's because people come in for meetings to sit down, say, what are the requirements, we give them the requirements.
we are spending time with them planning and then going out and visiting the site.
and we're -- we're maintaining and keeping records in our software that we pay for on an annual basis for these things.
that's why we set those minimums to cover our admin costs and our costs for software and things like that.
>> all right.
let's look at the site plan.
site plan says $52 per hour.
with a four hour minimum.
my question is if it takes four and a half hours, we have built in here to get paid for that extra, for that half hour, right?
if it takes eight hours, we're eight times 52.
my question is, if it takes two hours, why is that person forced to pay the equivalent of four hours of service?
as a minimum.
>> the minimum of four, we are covering -- we're going to take at least two hours in the review and the handling and everything that happens in the office.
>> all right.
you are saying it's going to take us four hours anyway.
>> that's correct.
>> but --
>> why isn't four times 52?
why isn't it the same thing that you have except for the minimum.
>> okay.
by the time we do the intake, the review, the report on it, we have our first two hours tied up.
just to drive to any site in Travis County and come back and enter another report is going to take another two hours.
that's why -- and there are times that if we have to drive so far northwest Travis County, that will be more than that two hours in the inspection.
any time a marshal leaves the office, drives in that vehicle, turns around, comes back and enters another report to show that he did the inspection, we will more than eat up that additional two hours.
that's why we -- we want people to understand up front, that it's going to take us four hours.
>> all right, then we y don't we say a minimum of $204.
>> that's a good point, judge, we could do that.
>> I agree the complaints that we will get if we get one will be it only took the fire marshal's office two hours, but they charged me a minimum of four because that's what we say.
if it had taken them eight hours, I would have to pay 8 times $52, which is right.
when you think about it.
some of these we make it clear that travel time will be billed.
some of them we don't even address it.
is the request that our policy be that we include the time spent to travel to and from a location?
>> I believe that once I include the travel time and -- the one that's I include the travel time are primarily for the reinspections or special permits or those type of things.
we are assuming travel time in our normal building permit.
we are -- our permit fees are set to the point that we know that we're going to travel.
to do those things.
but we don't know that we're going to travel for reinspection.
and if I get a request for a reinspection, and the marshal drives there and he spends two hours out there, and I only bill for two hours, I've actually used the marshal for four hours.
that's why for reinspection type of things, I'm trying to clarify that we want to recover the cost for the travel.
>> okay.
let's just think about it.
because when I looked at it, my first thought was if there are cases where we would charge travel and we want to clarify that, why wouldn't we just generally state a description of those cases?
they would trigger travel time costs.
what you are saying is that you have already figured it into the others.
>> that's correct: when you apply for a building permit, those fees, we are figuring in our costs for our travels to go and do the normal inspections for that building permit, the reinspections are extra.
>> my last question is, for special project, we have the fee is $500.
plus $52 per hour.
for plans, review and inspections.
and my question here is what does $500 cover?
everything expect for plan review?
and inspection?
>> that includes -- the $500 is to cover our intake of the plans, entering this information into our software tracking system for occupancies in Travis County, the initial review of the plans, and our communications back and forth with people because typically when we get a plan in, it is often rejected the first time.
sometimes twice.
but this initial $500 is basically like saying our basic building permit fee was $750.
it was going to require one or two inspections.
but this for a special project, I expect that it will take less review time up front.
but it is going to -- there is going to be some overhead involved if we only meet with the people, review everything, everything is okay the first time, we issue the permit and we do one inspection, we're going to have about $500 in hourly rate at $50 an hour tied up in the plan, if everything goes exactly right on the first time.
>> did we model the wording of our fees after -- after another public entity's fee schedule?
>> I -- the changes that I made, I did not.
i just based upon my experience with dealing with these fees in this office is where I got this wording.
now, I did use portions of the existing fee schedule.
but as far as the changes that I made, I -- I based upon experience what we're working with our current fees.
>> does international code recommend a fee schedule?
>> yes, sir.
>> I'm thinking more about the wording and how you describe the fee more than what the fee actually is.
except on some of this, if I -- if I saw my building and said $500 plus seven hours at 52.50, my first question would be what would the $500 cover?
see what I'm saying?
and you are saying we will be able to describe that if the question is put to us?
>> yes, sir.
the -- with that building valuation table, I have only included the table here.
but there's another portion that are pages about how they came up with those dollar fees per square foot.
and it's based upon administrative costs and record keeping and things like that, as well as the number of people that you are going -- to have to have to do the inspections and the time involved in the inspections.
>> okay.
any other questions?
i was left with the impression that for the average person, who has not dealt with the fire marshal's office before or the international fire code, this is sort of complicated.
and -- but if we cannot simplify it, so be it.
but I do think we ought to make it a point to try to do that.
but if we have it back on in two weeks, I guess we can see what residents have concerns and what they are.
hopefully they will be called to our attention.
okay?
is that all right?
two weeks okay?
you.
>> huh.
>> I think we ought to make it available to whoever wants to see it and -- in as easy a manner as possible and -- I'm not sure exactly what we do when we recommend other fee changes for new fees, but I would follow that procedure and process.
it's worked pretty well, I think, because it has generated some input from residents.
>> okay.
>> we have had one request for the information based upon the agenda item and we provided that to the home builders association, although these fees will not probably -- probably not directly impact them.
i think they are involved with single family residential.
these fees do not apply to them, but they are monitoring the court and the fee schedules and things like that.
but we provided that yesterday on request.
>> I think that is a benefit, judge, Commissioners, that it's really easy now, based upon how -- how everything is posted, because just like when we got the questions regarding the schedule, all we had to do was refer them to the backup of the agenda and there it was.
and then Commissioner Davis, you brought up a very good point, too.
i think it would be smart of us to place these new proposed fees on our website and let people access that as well and ask the questions.
and give them as much information as possible.
>>
>> [indiscernible]
>> two weeks from today is the 19th of January.
2010.
we will see you.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Friday, January 8, 2010 3:31 PM
