CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW MEMORANDUM APRIL 19, 2011 STUDY SESSION OVERVIEW OF CODE

Transcription

1 CITY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW MEMORANDUM 3. 3 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: City Council Jannie L. Quinn, City Attorney APRIL 19, 2011 STUDY SESSION OVERVIEW OF CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION INTRODUCTION This memorandum will briefly describe the history of the Code Enforcement Division, the scope of the Division's enforcement activities, Code Enforcement experiences and emerging issues. BACKGROUND The Code Enforcement Division was created in 1998 in an effort to centralize the Code Enforcement functions of the City. The primary goals of the new program included the creation of a more streamlined process for residents with respect to code enforcement and assurance that complaints would not fall through the cracks; i.e., the Code Enforcement Division could serve as a clearinghouse and refer complaints outside the Division's scope of responsibility to the proper department. Scope Currently, a number of different City departments perform inspection and code enforcement functions. The Fire and Environmental Protection Division of the Fire Department is responsible for the Multi - Family Housing Inspection Program and addresses complaints involving three or more dwelling units in a single structure and hotels and motels containing six (6) or more guest rooms. This division also conducts routine inspections of State - regulated assembly, education and institutions such as hospitals, apartment complexes, day -care facilities and residential -care facilities. Fire suppression personnel also inspect business occupancies. The Police Department is responsible for enforcement of City Code violations involving vicious animals, barking dogs and dogs off leashes. In addition, the Police Department handles complaints related to vehicles on the public street, including abandoned or unregistered vehicles and parking violations. Public Services is responsible for abandoned shopping cart

2 Page 2 enforcement and graffiti abatement on public property. Public Works handles newsracks and solid waste violations. Located in the City Attorney's Office since its creation, the Code Enforcement Division has two major focus areas neighborhood preservation and Zoning Code enforcement. Neighborhood Preservation Neighborhood preservation provisions are found in Chapter 25 of the Mountain View City Code. The particular areas of focus are contained in the findings /purpose of Section 25. 1, which states: The city council finds and determines that these regulations are necessary to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the public, to stabilize and protect the aesthetic appearances, as well as the quality and character of neighborhoods, residential districts, commercial districts and industrial districts, and to prevent the impairment of property values. Through this comprehensive approach, the safety, aesthetic values and general welfare of the neighborhoods, commercial districts and industrial districts and a suitable environment for community life will be preserved and enhanced. In addition to and in accordance with the determination made and the authority granted by the State of California under Section of the Vehicle Code to remove unlicensed, unregistered, abandoned, wrecked, dismantled or inoperative vehicles or parts thereof on private or public property, creates a condition which reduces the value of private property, promotes blight and deterioration, invites plundering, creates fire hazards, constitutes an attractive nuisance creating a hazard to the health and safety of minors, creates a potential harborage for rodents and insects and is injurious to the aesthetics, health, safety and general welfare of that community." Approximately 75 percent of the Code Enforcement Division caseload is dedicated to property maintenance issues such as illegal dumping, front yard storage, vehicles on private property and sign violations. Zoning Code Enforcement Zoning issues also comprise a major portion of the Code Enforcement Division caseload. The City establishes land use objectives, goals and policies in its General Plan. The zoning provisions of the Mountain View City Code implement the General Plan into specific requirements for development, allowed uses and use permits to achieve the purpose of the General Plan. The Code Enforcement Division is then responsible for ensuring compliance with the General Plan through enforcement of the Zoning Code.

3 Page 3 Approximately 25 percent of the Division's caseload is related to Zoning and Building Code enforcement. However, zoning enforcement is more time - intensive and accounts for 50 percent of the Code Enforcement Officer' s time. Typical zoning violations include conducting a use that is not permitted in a zone or operating a use without the required permit. An example would be the construction and renting of an unpermitted dwelling unit in a commercial zone. The most challenging cases involve nonconforming uses or structures that were once legal but have been illegally expanded and, as a result, must be brought into compliance with the current zoning requirements. Experience Typically a code enforcement case is generated by a complaint, either external or, as we are finding more and more often, from fellow employees who observe violations when they are out in the community. In an optimal situation, the Code Enforcement Officer contacts the responsible party either the property owner or perhaps the tenant. Once the officer educates the responsible party regarding the nature of the violation and the corrective action that needs to be taken to bring the property into compliance, the responsible party brings the property into compliance. For 65 percent of our cases, this is the experience of the Code Enforcement Officers. The remaining 35 percent involve repeat offenders who have been through the process previously, more serious violations requiring a significant expenditure of time or money to rectify or the responsible party simply contests the violation and an enforcement action must be initiated. After 11 years of code compliance experience aimed at preserving neighborhoods, the Code Enforcement Division holds itself accountable to three different "customers" in each case. First, the responsible party is a customer and deserves to be treated respectfully. This is accomplished by providing a clear explanation of the violation of the City Code and the steps necessary to bring the property into compliance. Unless the violation creates a life safety issue requiring immediate action or the offense is a repeat violation, the responsible party is given a reasonable amount of time to bring the property into compliance. The Code Enforcement Division's second " customer" is the complaining party who also deserves to be treated in a respectful manner and is likewise entitled to a clear explanation of the violation of the City Code and the steps necessary to bring the property into compliance, as well as periodic updates regarding the case. The residents of the City of Mountain View are the third customer group and are entitled to uniform enforcement of City Codes. Customer service entails treating all three customer groups fairly and can be very challenging when the process becomes adversarial due to failure or refusal to comply. Effective enforcement requires a constant balancing of limited resources and prioritization of the caseload.

4 Page 4 Enforcement techniques have evolved since the Division was established in Historically, violations of the City Code were addressed through criminal prosecution. Over time, municipalities have turned to an administrative process for a number of reasons. The administrative remedy decriminalizes city code violations and also provides cities with the ability to recover the costs incurred in obtaining compliance with the city code. The administrative process consists of administrative citations and compliance orders and provides an opportunity for the responsible party to challenge the citation or compliance order. It also provides more cost recovery directly to the City than under either civil or criminal prosecution which shares cost recovery with the County. Cases involving repeat violations, life safety issues and egregious conduct, or where probation is desired to ensure the violations do not reoccur remain appropriate for criminal prosecution. Less than 1 percent of the Code Enforcement Division enforcement actions result in criminal prosecution. The City' s adoption of administrative remedies in 2002 changed code enforcement dramatically. Enforcement is handled entirely by the City. Administrative citations and compliance orders are effective tools to bring properties to compliance. An individual can contest the citation or compliance order and have an appeal hearing. The Code Enforcement Division can also request a hearing for compliance orders. On average, three (3) administrative hearings are conducted each month and represent less than 10 percent of active code enforcement cases. A responsible party can also appeal to Superior Court if they wish to contest the Hearing Officer' s decision. Approximately one such appeal is filed each year. The City' s approach to code enforcement has also changed. The Code Enforcement Division has developed task forces to coordinate the efforts of all the departments that are involved in or impacted by each case, whether it is the Building Division or Planning Division of Community Development or the Fire Department. This collaboration has been very effective in developing strategies to address cases with complex and overlapping violations and provides an opportunity to resolve compliance issues more efficiently. The scope of the Code Enforcement Division's responsibility has increased since its inception. Administrative remedies did not exist when the Division was created. The scope of the Division's responsibility has expanded to include sidewalk cafe license violations, signoff on temporary use permits and enforcement actions originating in outside departments, including enforcement of Building Code and permitting requirements. Emerging Issues The Code Enforcement Division has identified two emerging issues. First, the Code Enforcement Division and Community Development Department are proposing revisions to the Sign Ordinance in response to concerns about temporary signs

5 Page 5 expressed by the business community. The concepts of the proposed ordinance will be discussed briefly at the Study Session. Second, the Code Enforcement Division is receiving a number of complaints regarding mobile canteens. A new generation of food trucks is operating in the Bay Area. However, these food vendors are not always mobile. The existing ordinance needs to be updated to address this use and potentially establish new regulations. The Code Enforcement Division intends to work with the Community Development Department to prepare revisions to the existing mobile canteen provisions of the itinerant food vendor ordinance for Council' s consideration over the coming months. The Code Enforcement Division anticipates the challenges the program currently faces, due to its limited resources, will only increase as the housing stock continues to age and significant financial investment is required to properly maintain declining properties or redevelop the properties. From a longer -term perspective, the future of the Code Enforcement Division and the Multi - Family Housing Inspection Program may be an appropriate topic for a Study Session. Such a Study Session would include a discussion of the program' s goals and the potential to consolidate enforcement functions in an effort to centralize code enforcement even further. At this Study Session, the Code Enforcement Division will provide the Council with an overview of the Code Enforcement Division, highlight a few cases, provide statistics and answer any questions the Council may have regarding code enforcement. Prepared by: ^ Ja ietlmn ity A Q JLQ / 5 / CAM M -EA