HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/11/2008 - PROPOSED REVISIONS TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 5, ARTICLE DATE: March 11, 2008 WORK SESSION ITEM
STAFF: Felix Lee FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL
Teresa Ablao
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Proposed Revisions to City Code Chapter 5, Article II, Division 3, Dangerous Buildings.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff is proposing adoption of the national model 2006International Property Maintenance Code
(IPMC) with the 2007 Supplement as the basic template, plus local amendments, to update and
improve the current"Dangerous Building Code"and the current"Rental Housing Standards"(which
are addressed as a separate item). The IPMC is updated every three years. Staff s goal is to produce
minimum standards that reflect Council's priorities.
This item focuses on the"Dangerous Building"provisions currently located in Chapter 5 of the City
Code. The proposed revisions would replace the City's current 1976 Edition of the Uniform Code
for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings (UCADB) adopted in 1979. For clarity of terminology,
the new provisions are broadly identified as the "Unsafe Buildings Code" and includes buildings
ranging in condition from "public nuisance"to "unfit to occupy"to "dangerous."
Purpose:
The purpose of the proposed revisions is to protect,promote and enhance the physical and economic
health, safety, welfare and sustainability of the community with respect to: existing buildings,
equipment and premises(whether occupied or vacant)that are,in order of increasing level of hazard,
determined to be: public nuisance, unfit to occupy or dangerous.
The revisions apply to all existing residential and nonresidential buildings, including exterior
attachments(awnings,chimneys,gutters,porches,etc.,)premises,and equipment.The intent of the
proposed changes is to improve the current code by:
1. Clarifying the requirements are applicable to all buildings and structures;
2. Establishing a step-by-step approach to determine whether a property is a public nuisance,
unfit to occupy, or a danger;
3. Prescribing specific corrective actions; and,
4. Providing a clear distinction between aesthetic/appearance and"dangerous,unsafe,unfit for
occupancy and public nuisance"
Problem
The current adopted model code (UCADB) is obsolete and inconsistent with processes and
procedures specified in the City Code for addressing and abating "dangerous," "unfit to occupy,"
and "public nuisance" buildings and premises.
March 11, 2008 Page 2
For example:
• UCADB does not clearly distinguish between"dangerous" and"unfit for occupancy."
• UCADB specifies an elaborate appeal process inconsistent with Chapter 2 of the City Code
(appeals procedure, inconsistent since adoption).
• UCADB does not provide a monitoring process for"vacant"or"abandoned"buildings that
have been entered illegally.
• UCADB has inadequate procedures for responding to imminent and immediate hazards,e.g.,
boarding and securing "abandoned" and"vacant"buildings.
• UCADB does not clearly address the"premises"in addition to "buildings."
Recommendation and Bottom Line
Staff recommends adoption of the proposed revisions to protect,promote and enhance the physical
and economic health, safety, welfare and sustainability of the community with respect to: existing
buildings, equipment and premises that are determined to be a public nuisance, unfit to occupy
or dangerous. If Council directs, staff will bring forward an ordinance for Council consideration
at a regular Council meeting, which could be scheduled as early as April 15, 2008.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Does Council concur with the proposed revisions?
a. If not,does Council wish to review additional provisions not included in the changes,
or delete certain provisions?
b. If not, does Council wish to retain the current UCADB unchanged?
2. Does Council wish to consider an ordinance adopting the proposed amended IPMC on April
15, 2008 or on a different time frame?
BACKGROUND
Discussion about revising "Dangerous Building Standards" emerged to update the City's current
obsolete code. Council conducted two previous work sessions to discuss the proposed revisionson
September 12, 2006 and August 14, 2007.
At the August 14, 2007 work session, Council directed staff to further clarify the need, purpose,
benefits and corrective action process in the proposed revisions(See Attachment 1). Responses to
several of these significant issues are listed below:
1. "Imminent-danger" conditions that endanger or threaten the life, health, safety of the
occupants or public requiring immediate corrective action include:
a. Presence of explosives, explosive fumes or vapors
b. Actual or highly probable structural failure/collapse
March 11, 2008 Page 3
C. Leaking gas appliances
d. Electrical service to building is arcing
2. Conditions that render building "unfit to occupy" and require immediate vacation of
premises include:
a. Lack of adequate exits
b. Lack of required and operable heating equipment(in cold weather)
C. Infestation by vermin(bats,rodents, insects, etc.)
d. Inoperable sewage disposal system(back-up)
e. Presence of excessive mold/mildew by virtue of strong odor and visual evidence of
large amounts of fungal growth inside building
f. Deteriorating foundation
3. If neglected, "public nuisance" conditions that could "endanger the life, health and safety
of the occupants or the public' include:
a. Broken or missing steps at building entrance/exit posing hazard
b. Broken or damaged exterior sidewalks, driveways that present a significant
pedestrian hazard
C. Leaking roof due to deteriorated roofing
d. Sagging or broken exterior building appurtenances(gutters,porches, awnings, etc.)
e. Abandoned building with live electric/gas service connected
f. Stagnant water more than 72 hours can be breeding place for disease-carrying(West
Nile virus)mosquitoes
g. Severely dilapidated/broken fencing potentially posing personal injury risks,
especially to children
h. Deteriorated exterior building surface protective treatment (paint) that no longer
prevents intrusion of rain and moisture into building interior
i. A new building remains unoccupied and unfinished without a final inspection or
certificate of occupancy indefinitely after the issuance of the building permit
4. Comparison matrix of the proposed revisions to the International Property Maintenance
Code (IPMC.) See matrix attached. (Attachment 2)
5. Description of the processes to identify, vacate/condemn, repair or demolish. See attached
flow charts that illustrate the step-by-step procedures. (Attachment 3)
6. Explanation of why the "public nuisances", such as broken sidewalks, stagnant water and
deteriorated fences are included in the proposed revisions: These `public nuisances" can
become health and safety issues as exemplified in #3 above.
7. Explain how the workload will be affected.
If passed,future staff work load is not yet quantifiable. However, many cities across the
country are experiencing dramatic increases in vacant buildings due to foreclosures. In
response, staff is proposing the "Vacant Building Notification" process to address
vacant/abandoned buildings. This process would require owners (individuals, investors or
March 11, 2008 Page 4
lenders) of buildings that have been vacant for more than 180 days, or have been unlawfully
entered or occupied ("breaking and entering') for criminal activity or trespassed by
vagrants, to secure the property from unauthorized entry, continuously monitor and
maintain the property in a condition that does not pose a threat to public health and/or
safety.
National, regional and local press have shown that in the midst of the sub prime mortgage
and foreclosure crisis, Fort Collins hasn't been hit as hard as its neighboring communities,
the state or the nation. However, staff is monitoring the effect closely with respect to
increases in vacant buildings as a result. Staff receives an update on foreclosed properties
from Security Title regularly, listing owners and property addresses. Staff uses this list as
a cross-reference for any properties that are reported as vacant or unsafe. For statistics on
the housing unit inventory, vacant housing units have increased 1%from the 2000 Census
to the estimates from the 2006 Census, currently a vacant housing rate of 5.3Yr 3,111
vacant housing units.
Staffresearched other Coloradojurisdictions to see whatprocedures they are following with
respect to increased foreclosure and vacant buildings.(Attachment 4)
Data
• 2007 Unsafe Buildings Report - this report illustrates the 10 properties that were
investigated in 2007 (Attachment 5)
• 3836 Manhattan Avenue - This case exemplifies the need for a preemptive process to
identify and monitor vacant/abandoned buildings that are at risk of being entered unlawfully
and potentially posing a significant public danger to the surrounding neighborhood. This
property began to show signs of neglect with a series of property nuisance violations(weeds,
outdoor storage, and rubbish) from July 2006 to August 2007,that were corrected. On July
17 2007, staff followed-up on a complaint that the building was open and unsecured. By
October 2007 the property burned and was demolished shortly thereafter.For details see the
attached overview. (Attachment 6)
Costs
1. Costs to the City:
Costs to the City to administer the program are anticipated to be covered by the current
operating budget for the Neighborhood and Building Services Department (NBS), unless
there is a significant increase in vacancies or abandoned properties. In which case, more
staff resources might be needed to maintain the current level of services.
2. Costs to the property owner:
Expenses depend on extent of corrective action which could range from roofing replacement
to demolition. Estimates of demolition and site cleanup expenses begin around $5,000 for
a small house (800 square feet) or outbuilding and increase accordingly with the size and
condition of the building and premises.
March 11, 2008 Page 5
In the event that the City was to initiate abatement of dangerous condition using a private third party
contractor, the initial cost would be borne by the City with the ability to place liens against the
property for full cost recovery. Abatement costs are dependent upon the size of the problem,
condition of site and who performs the abatement. However,to date,the City has not contracted or
performed abatements.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Planning and Zoning Board Work Session - July 13, 2007
Neighborhood and Building Services staff presented an overview of the Exterior Property
Maintenance, Dangerous Building Code and Rental Housing Code. The Board appreciated the
presentation. No formal action was taken and no minutes were taken as this meeting was a work
session and not a formal Planning and Zoning Board meeting.
Open public meeting-July 24, 2007
The meeting was attended by property managers, neighborhood representatives and the general
public. Building Services staff presented an overview of the changes being proposed to the
Dangerous Building Code and Rental Housing Code. Of those in attendance, more interest was
placed on the Rental Housing Code where general reaction to the proposals and revisions was
mostly favorable.
Building Review Board - July 26, 2007
Building Services staff presented an overview of the changes being proposed to the Dangerous
Building Code and Rental Housing Code. The Board understood that the proposed revisions relate
to life,health and safety and appreciated the presentation. The Board made no formal declaration.
Affordable Housing Board - September 6, 2007
Building Services staff presented an overview of the changes being proposed to the Dangerous
Building Code and Rental Housing Code. The Board determined that the revisions were good ideas
stating there is the need to protect life and health, but including requirements like doors on
bathrooms are not life and health issues. One item of concern is the Vacant Building Notification
Program and its effect on vacant commercial buildings.
North Fort Collins Business Association (NFCBA)- September 26, 2007
Neighborhood and Building Services staff presented an overview of the Exterior Property
Maintenance,Dangerous Building Code and Rental Housing Code.The NFCBA was most interested
in the Dangerous Building Code and Exterior Property Maintenance proposals. The association
members discussed the presentation and were generally pleased with the proposed approach to
address vacant buildings. Many members expressed concern over how vacant buildings had been
addressed along North College in the past.(A few years ago a couple of abandoned dilapidated
houses and a motel were repeatedly entered unlawfully and vandalized. Following protracted
efforts by the City to have the owner repair or demolish the buildings, new owners ultimately
removed the structures voluntarily)
March 11, 2008 Page 6
International Building Code(IBC) Code Review Committee-November 8, 2007
A committee of contractors,developers, architects, engineers,including staff from Latimer County
building department and Poudre Fire Authority and City staff was assembled to review the 2006
International Building Code. Building Services staff presented an overview of the proposed
revisions to Dangerous Building Code and Rental Housing Code. The Committee discussed the
revisions and reaction to the proposals and revisions was mostly favorable. No formal action and
no minutes were taken.
Fort Collins Board of Realtors- January 15, 2008
Building Services staff presented an overview of the proposed revisions to the Dangerous Building
Code and Rental Housing Code. Reaction was generally favorable. No formal action or minutes
were taken.
Staff continues public outreach through Neighborhood and Building Services' ongoing"Landlord
Education Series"covering topics such as: building and rental housing codes,nuisance codes, and
leases and evictions, to name a few.
ATTACHMENTS
1. August 14, 2007 Work Session Summary Memo
2. Code Comparison Matrix
3. Procedure flow charts
a. Procedure for Dangerous Buildings
b. Procedure for Properties Unfit to Occupy
C. Procedure for Public Nuisance Buildings
4. Research on foreclosure and vacant buildings other Colorado jurisdictions
5. 2007 Unsafe Buildings Report
6. 3826 Manhattan Avenue Overview
7. Building Review Board Minutes
8. Affordable Housing Board Minutes
9. Power Point Presentation
Fort Collins Neighborhood & Building Services
• ctty of FortColltna 281 N. College Ave P O Box 580• Fort Collins. CO 80522-0580: Voice:970 221 6760 FAX: 970 224 6134
ATTACHMENT# 1
Memorandum
To: Mayor&City Council Members
Thru: Darin Attebeny, City Manager
Diane Jones,Deputy City Manager
Joe Frank, Interim PDT Director
From: Felix Lee,Neighborhood&Building Services Director
Beth Sowder,Neighborhood Services Manager
Mike Gebo,Building Code Services Manager
Date: August 15,2007
Re: August 14,2007 Council Work Session—Neighborhood Quality Items
Joe Frank, Felix Lee, Mike Gebo, and Beth Sowder, with assistance from Ginny Sawyer and Teresa Ablao,
presented the following four items affecting overall neighborhood quality to obtain further direction from
• Council:
(a) Suggested revisions to the City Code,Chapter 5,Article II.,Division 3,Dangerous Buildings
(b) Some options for implementing minimum exterior property maintenance standards to address dirt/dead
yards, dilapidated fences,excessive chipping or peeling paint, and deteriorated roofs and gutters. Teresa
Ablao and Ginny Sawyer were also present to answer questions.
(c) Suggested revisions the City Code,Chapter 5,Article VI,Division 2,Housing Standards
(d) Update on the new occupancy-limit enforcement program in effect since the first of this year
Respectively,for each item,Council directed staff to do the following:
Dangerous Buildings
• Define the problem that we are trying to solve and what's working well.
• Provide examples of what we are trying to solve, what's working...pictures...costs...data.
• Clarify specifically what the proposals are and are not trying to accomplish.
• Clearly delineate which provisions are applicable to vacant versus occupied buildings.
• Revise and clarify list of "dangerous" items and identify those that represent truly "dire" and
dangerous conditions.
• Clarify conditions that explain staff s need to expedite a corrective action versus what can be
achieved through the current process.
• • Identify the proposed revisions covered in the International Property Maintenance Code via
matrix and if appropriate, to adopt a model code versus incorporating amendments into various
sections of the City Code.
• Provide a Standard Operating Procedure that shows problem identification, declaration of
dangerous, condemnation, repair or demolition.
• Explain what conditions or combinations of conditions are needed to endanger the life, health and
safety of the occupants or the public.
• Explain why the Dangerous Building Code section is the best placement for conditions that
otherwise might be considered nuisances, such as broken sidewalk, stagnant water, and
deteriorated fences?
• If passed, explain how case load would be affected.
Exterior Property Maintenance
The Mayor and City Council unanimously directed staff to move forward with proposing Exterior Property
Maintenance Codes. They agreed that public-private partnerships to help people in need was an important focus
as well as to have the Codes proposed and adopted in order to have the tools needed if/when properties
ultimately fail to come into compliance. Council directed staff to provide the following information at the next
work session:
• Coordinate and compile assistance programs, including and possible public-private partnerships
available for owner occupants and for rental owners that provide"qualifying affordable housing."
• Define the problem and the scope of the problem—provide examples.
• Provide estimated total number of housing units in the NW quadrant and how many total buildings did
the survey represent considering that some buildings had multiple violations.
• Determine if City should or could offer mitigation guidelines/standards for dead/dirt yards.
• Describe how our current and proposed codes compare to the International Property Maintenance Code
(IPMC)via a matrix showing the comparisons.
• Explain the rationale behind staffs recommendation for Option 2A—to address one or more violations
that can be viewed from the public street. Address why Option 3 was not recommended. List other
conditions we.considered but rejected; explain why we chose "viewed from the street" versus from
adjacent property line and explain what would be the impact of the "visible from the adjacent property"
option.
• Explain how involuntary enforced compliance would be last resort. Establish enforcement process that
focuses on most"dire"conditions,and multiple lesser violations with examples and/or matrix.
• Note conditions that likely would be violations more prevalent in rental v.owner-occupied.
Staff will bring this information back to Council,targeted within the next 2 months for another work session
with the intent of bringing drafted code language for Council consideration prior to the end of the year.
Page-2-
Rental Housing
• Provide examples of what we are trying to solve, what's working well...picture...costs...data.
• • Clarify specifically what the proposals are trying to accomplish and not.
• Clarify the need for and source of the minimum standards. Provide Health Department perspective
on issues considered health related, such as; ventilation, sanitation, heating, infestation, etc.
• Catalog list of new provisions in order of priority and evaluate need for additional provisions not
included, such as door and window locks. Distinguish what revisions are "nice to have" v.
revisions that are absolutely "necessary". For instance, having smoke alarms seems more important
than having two electrical outlets.
• Compare the proposed revisions (via matrix) to those covered in the International Property
Maintenance Code and recommend if it is appropriate to adopt a model code versus incorporating
into a City Code.
• Identify the number of dwellings that would be affected by the new provisions.
• Identify sources that would be able to assist owners of low income rental properties comply with
the provisions.
• Can we estimate how many units will be "taken out" of the City housing inventory if this was
implemented?
• Explain the criteria for a building being old versus "historic".
• Explain how the updated standards might be "used" by tenants to get out of leases and if the City
should include specific regulatory mechanisms for its protection in such disputes.
Occupant-limit Enforcement
The Over Occupancy Enforcement Program was presented as a general overview. Council direction given
was to make changes as needed to continue effective enforcement.
• 1. Council seemed generally content...even complimentary to staff.
2. Council stressed that if staff encounters problems...don't wait to make changes.
3. The maximum of 3-unrelated adults clearly remains a council priority.
The next steps with the proposed revisions to the Rental Housing and Dangerous Building Codes will be to
continue with the public out-reach, seeking comments from rental property organizations and CSU. Then
staff will bring requested responses back to Council at a second worksession targeted within the next 2
months with the intent of bringing drafted code language for Council consideration prior to the end of the
year.
•
Page-3-
• ATTACHMENT # 2
UNSAFE BUILDINGS CODE
COMPARISONS
Provision Current 1976 2oo6IPMC Proposed
UCADB** (model code) (IPMC + local )
Scope Applicable to all Applicable to all buildings Applicable to all buildings
buildings"declared including appurtenances, including appurtenances,
dangerous" equipment, and premises equipment, and premises
specified by 17
prescribed
conditions
Purpose To establish To establish minimum To establish minimum abatement
minimum abatement standards standards
abatement
standards
Compliance & Complaint based& Complaint based& Complaint based&observed
inspections observed observed
Responsibility Owner Owner:building& Owner:building&premises
premises
• Violations& Criminal Option of local jurisdiction Generally criminal misdemeanor
penalties misdemeanor unless lesser nuisance conditions
for which could be civil infraction
Appeals Heard by Building Heard by appeals board of Heard by Building Review Board.
Review Board. jurisdiction Identifies"appellant"as: owner,
lien or lease holder,and parties of
interest within 800 feet.
(consistent with current City
Planning&Zoning Board hearing
process)
Responsible Owner Owner Owner
party
Dangerous, Unfit to Occupy or Public Nuisance
Inadequate Faulty or lack of Ugflt to Occupy:unfit to Ugflt to Occupy:unfit to
Sanitation sanitation facilities occupy when found unsafe occupy when found unsafe or
or otherwise or unlawful of disrepair, unlawful of disrepair,lack of
determined to be lack of maintenance, maintenance,insanitary,lack of
unsanitary and unfit insanitary,lack of ventilation&illumination,vermin
for habitation. ventilation&illumination, infested,inadequate heating
vermin infested, facilities or location of structure
inadequate heating causes hazard to occupants or the
facilities or location of public
structure causes hazard to
occupants or the public
Provision Current 1976 20o6 IPMC Proposed
UCADB ** model code) (IPMC + local)
Structural Specified defects Unsafe structure when Dangerous:defective or
hazards that endanger the dangerous to the deteriorated foundations:floor
life,health,property occupants-or the public supports;walls;ceilings or roofs;
or safety of the because of lack of fireplaces and chimneys
occupants or public safeguards against fire;
unsafe equipment;
decayed,dilapidated,
structurally unsafe or
unstable foundation that
partial or complete
collapse is possible
Nuisance If considered a Unfit for human Ugfit to Occupy/Unlawful:
`public nuisance"in occupancy because the defects or lack of proper operation
common law or structure is in disrepair or of: electrical wiring;plumbing;
"jurisprudence" lack maintenance, mechanical equipment;weather
insanitary,vermin intrusion;fire hazard;inadequate
infested,contains exiting facilities;lack of required
contamination or because fire extinguishing systems;vermin
location of the structure infested;stagnant water which
constitutes a hazard to remains'72 hours after a rain
occupants or to the public event; unauthorized use or
occupancy of a structure
Order to repair, Standards establish Standards establish Standards establish procedures to
vacate or procedures to order procedures to order repair, order repair,vacation or
demolish repair,vacation or vacation or demolition of demolition of structures,
demolition of structures,including legal including legal posting,notices
structures, posting,notices and and appeals process consistent
including legal appeals process. with City code provisions.
posting,notices and
appeals process.
Emergency Not addressed. Imminent dangerous Imminent dangerous conditions
Measures conditions authorize the authorize the code official to
code official to declare the declare the building unsafe to
building unsafe to occupy, occupy,to order public way
to order public way closures,to authorize emergency
closures,to authorize work or repairs and disconnection
emergency work or repairs of utilities.
and disconnection of
utilities.
Vacant Buildings
Notification Not addressed. Not addressed. New program to require owners of
program for vacant buildings that are declared
vacant and/or dangerous to register the property
abandoned for one-year intervals and provide
buildings contact information,continuously
monitor the building and insure
the building is secured from illegal
entry.
2
• Provision Current 1976 2oo6 IPMC Proposed
UCADB** (model code) (IPMC + local)
Demolition Cumbersome legal Establishes legal Establishes updated legal
procedures for the procedures for the procedures for the demolition and
demolition and demolitioa and removal of removal of dangerous structures
removal of dangerous structures by by the City.
dangerous the jurisdiction.
structures,by the
City if necessary.
Salvage Not addressed. Allows jurisdiction to sell Allows the City to sell salvageable
materials salvageable materials to materials to offset the cost of
offset demolition costs. demolition.
Transfer of City files notice with Unlawful to sell or transfer Unlawful to sell or transfer
ownership county declaring property without property without disclosure of
building disclosure of compliance compliance order
"dangerous" order
(none filed to date)
Appeals Heard by Building Heard by appeals board of Heard by Building Review Board.
Review Board. jurisdiction Identifies"appellant"as: owner,
lien or lease holder,and parties of
interest within Boo feet.
(consistent with current City
Planning&Zoning Board hearing
• process)
Exterior Premises
Site Not addressed. Requires the site& Requires the site&premises to he
premises to be free from free from vermin infestation.
vermin infestation.
Building Exteriors
Surfaces and Not addressed Exterior walls to be Exterior walls to be
building unless defects are weatherproofed surface weatherproofed surface
elements considered (including paint)that (including paint)that prevents
dangerous to prevents deterioration and deterioration and entrance of rain
occupants or public. entrance of rain and and moisture into interior
moisture into interior building.
building
Insect screens Not addressed. Doors and windows Doors and windows used for
required for ventilation of ventilation must have screens
habitable rooms,food available from April t—Nov t
preparation and food
service areas for human
consumption; option of
jurisdiction for time of
year
• 3
Provision Current 1976 2oo6IPMC Proposed
UCADB** (model code) (IPMC + local)
Building Interiors
General Not addressed All structural members All structural members and
unless defects are and equipment maintained equipment maintained in good
considered in good repair and sound repair and sound and sanitary
dangerous to and sanitary condition; condition;requires all stairs,
occupants or public. requires all stairs, landings,decks,walling surfaces
landings,decks,walking maintained in sound condition;
surfaces maintained in interior surfaces maintained in
sound condition;interior good and sanitary condition;
surfaces maintained in peeling,chipping flaking,paint or
good and sanitary loose plaster to be corrected
condition;peeling,
chipping flaking,paint or —
loose plaster to be
corrected
Interior Inadequate eadts,
systems insufficient fire-
resistive materials,
faulty wiring,
heating apparatus
or otherwise
determined to be a
fire hazard.
**UCADB—1976 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings
4
PROCEOURE FOR DANGEROUS BUIL01146S
• Attachment 3a
STAFF RECEIVES NDTIFICATION
VERIFY AND fDENTCFY
MAZARD(S)BY INSPECTION
IMMEDIATE DMIIGER AM
I1AZMAT
ANY OCCUPANTS MUST VACATE
IMMEDIATELY
• POST BUILDING FOR RISK OF
INJURY OR DEATH
NOTIFY UTILITIES AND OTHERS
(Pvbfr-Service.Fire Dept.eEc)
NOTIFY OWNER OF
CORRECTIONS
PROBLEIt+t CORRECTED NO CORFmcndN
RE-4NSPECTlON DEIdtOI filON1R INQ�JAL;
•
Pt?S?INq REIN*E0
PROCEDURE FOR PkOOERTIES UNFIT TO
OCCUPY
{Condemns#Ion}
Attachment 3b
STAFF RZZCE VES NOTIFICATION
OF PROBLEM
VERIFY AND IDENTIFY
HAZARD(9)BY INSPECTION
(Structural, equipmaM sanitation,
ex t . W165tations,ekr-,)
POST BUILDING AS UNSAFE TO
OCCUPY
NOTIFY QYWNER OF
• CORRECTIONS
PROIl3iE�i NO CORRECTION-
RE-INSPECTION S CUI E FROM 4JAIl,AWFUI*ENTRY
I?Qi,=NG REMOVED TRACK AS VACANT
SAFE TO RE4XCL F'Y UNLAWFUL:ENTRY
•
ORDER OEMOLITIONIRDA&AL
Attachment 3c
PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE
BUILDINGS
STAFF RECEM N=Fr.ATM
VEMFY Ann IOENTWY NRURD3
ariNSFEcnaN
PUBLIC NUEN CE
IQ�learodd ? �
ar+ocwn�mnr�t+r oxuvl�u
oFcoaREaTwNs
NC7IIFY 0MMEft p NC cow=nm
oFc�cnoNs,
PROBL9d CGRRECfED 'too, 1iFCT10N w-wIwECTICN PO$rrWD 18611E 9CAa�oN9'. .
PaoPest PMAW lS9UE s1A I F:�i cl
VACAWW-XMM MAIM
..
NMW-ATM TRN=
POSTMiOAMW
• ATTACHMENT #4
Foreclosure &Vacant Building Research .
February 26, 2008
Fort Collins Foreclosure numbers in 2007:
Through December 19, 2007—there were 578 foreclosures in Fort Collins. The Larimer
County Trustee's Office indicated that Fort Collins has not been as badly impacted as
other.Larimer County jurisdictions or rural areas.
Other Colorado Jurisdictions number of vacant buildings and their policies to regulate:
Boulder: The vacant property still needs to meet our minimum trash,weed and snow
removal codes. If the property is in violation and is vacant due to foreclosure we will try
to locate the bank that owns the property for notification of violations as our codes
requires some form of notification to property owners (in this case the bank). This
information can be found with the county assessor's office but may take some research.
We will send notification to the bank and if the violation is not cleared in the time
allowed we will abate the property or cause the violation to be removed by our
contractors and send a bill to be paid by the bank. The bill is sent three times over a 90
day period and if not paid in that time frame the costs are assess to the property taxes.
We do not have a vacant property registry of any kind.
• Luckily, we have only had a few foreclosed properties last summer and we have very few
vacant properties.
Lakewood: We don't have any real policies in place for vacant, abandoned or foreclosed
properties. We work with our Building Department to get open buildings boarded up, so
they're the ones that actually do that piece of it when necessary. When we have issues
with foreclosed properties,we pretty much handle them like any other complaint, except
that we usually call the attorney and mail a notice of violation to the mortgage holder in
addition to the property owner. We still abate foreclosed properties and just bill the bank
(depending where they are in the foreclosure process). Unfortunately,we let abandoned
buildings stand. I don't have numbers for you, as we simply haven't tracked them.
Aurora: We recently gave a presentation to the Code Committee and then to City
Council at our Winter Workshop regarding foreclosures.
Currently, we abate nuisances (i.e. weeds,trash) and secure the building. Council wanted
staff to look into re-landscaping vacated properties, since the landscaping has such a
negative impact on the neighborhood. After lengthy research and discussion with our
legal department, it became evident that it would require a State Law to allow a
municipal government to go onto a property and make improvements without the owner's
approval.
•
We researched several cities around the country and didn't find anyone doing anything
other than what I mentioned. However, in the east they don't have the problem of
keeping the landscape watered, only mowed and the buildings secure.
What we recommended to Council was a Foreclosure Specialist position,which would be
an 18-24 month contract position. The Specialist would oversee all the foreclosed
properties (estimated to be approx. 6,900 properties and approx. 4,830 of those are
single-family) and create a base of communication with the lending institutions, discuss
solutions to correct and/or maintain landscaping, etc. Council liked the idea and we are
moving forward with a Task Force, which will be made up of a Foreclosure Specialist,
private real estate brokers, some bank representatives, a Council Member, and a couple of
citizens. I'm planning on writing the job description this week for the Foreclosure
Specialist.
Westminster: We are flying by the seat of our pants on vacants/foreclosures. We have
had some success with our administrative citation process in regards to threatening a lien
when we know the bank h as taken possession,but otherwise, we are really up against a
beast that we are unfamiliar with and learning as we go.
Greeley: Foreclosures are certainly a problem. It is not illegal, of course, to have a
vacant property,but it is a violation to have a property to not be maintained as far as
landscaping,trash, snow removal, etc. We are also alert to empty homes that have been
broken into by vagrants. In fact, we had one a few weeks ago started by some uninvited
visitors who started a fire to keep warm. No one was hurt but the house was completely
destroyed.
Here is what we've been doing:
1. Code enforcement tickets all properties that are in violation of property care standards,
including vacant ones in bankruptcy or foreclosure. We post the property and send a
letter/citation to the owner of record, often an out of state bank. This falls under our
Administrative Hearing process so service is a bit easier. If the bank does not take care
of the issue, and does not get an extension from the Administrative Hearing Officer(not
often granted unless for cause), and does not show up to their hearing, the AHO has been
finding them in violation and fining them the full penalty amount of$1,000 plus court
costs. That seems to get their attention since, if they don't pay the fine promptly,the
property gets a lien filed against it as well. We have had a couple of the banks hire a local
property manager to take care of these properties.
2. Through our Neighborhood Building Blocks program we also have a coordinated
response to some of the more difficult problem properties. We have alerted neighbors to
be alert and report promptly any suspicious activity at these empty homes. We have a
very active Neighborhood Watch program that is managed through our Neighborhood
Resource Office in partnership with the Police Department. Citizens have been very
helpful with such reports. Typically,if a home is in foreclosure, the utilities have also
been turned off. If we determine that such is the case, and we have folks apparently
residing there, Building Inspections makes a visit, and posts the building as .
uninhabitable. We notify the owner of record that all parties much immediately evacuate
• the premises or face a citation; and that the home must be secured. In difficult cases we
have had the police assist with removal of occupants.
3. Problem property conditions can be addressed through vendors, such as trash, weeds,
etc. If we determine that its condition is posing an immediate impact to the area,we get
an emergency order from the AHO to contract for the work to be done and then bill the
landowner(again followed up with a lien if there is no payment made on the bill). With
snow removal we can abate those via contract without going to the AHO since it is on
public right of way.
4. On a collaborative note, I serve with about 30 other community members on a
county-wide Foreclosure Alternatives Coalition to try to get info out to families about
getting help as soon as they start to struggle with house payments. Through a marketing
and education sub-committee, I put together a brochure (also available in
Spanish) and we are trying to saturate the community with the message via utility bill
stuffers,bus bench advertising, via our local Cable channel program (we did a 5 minute
interview on resources and help on our Inside Greeley show), and are using all local
newsletters (churches,realtors, service clubs, etc.) to get the word out. We also have
support from the Weld County Treasurer's office who added the message and contact info
in the annual tax valuation and bill. A week ago we made a presentation to local lenders
and banks asking them for cash and/or in kind support to help the effort. Our public
trustee sits in on our committee which helps with more precise data on the foreclosure hot
• spots throughout the county.
5. In addition to education,we are also trying to provide funds to help support more
financial counselors through Consumer Credit Counseling, a private local counselor and
Brothers Redevelopment (who runs the Colorado Foreclosure Hotline) -those three
agencies have teamed to provide co-referrals and support to the Coalition as well.
6. On a smaller scale,the Greeley Urban Renewal Authority(operates through my
department)is reviewing homes that are going through foreclosure in our target
assistance neighborhoods. We have set aside funds to purchase up to four homes this
year,which would be rehabbed and then made available for resale to low to moderate
income families. We do owner financing and case management on these home sales to
help provide a safety net in home purchase and to keep the mortgage costs within range.
Commerce City: I don't know the number of foreclosures we have in Commerce
City but it is A LOT, especially in our new subdivisions. We can issue a warning notice
and try to contact the agency/bank responsible but I have found this ineffective. My
approach is to post a large, orange legal.notice(on a wooden stick in the front yard)
outlining the violations, citing the law and setting a compliance date(10 days). The
notice also outlines the consequences of not coming into compliance i.e. the City's clean-
up subcontractors abate the violations. After 10 days if the property is not in compliance
we schedule a property clean-up and abate all the violations.
Longmont: I have attached a spreadsheet that I got from our CDBG coordinator outlining
some of the foreclosure initiatives that are going on(see attached).
In addition my office has had information presented to the Neighborhood Group Leaders,
last year, and again this year, we are providing training specifically with HOAs about
dealing with foreclosures, and we have worked with individual HOAs to find some
partnership solutions to problems on a case by case basis. Last year we also passed an
abatement ordinance to help abate code violations.
Loveland: Nothing in place to address vacant properties or foreclosures.
Pueblo: Nothing in place to address vacant properties or foreclosures.
Neighborhood and Building Services
PO Box 580
Citv of Pork Collins Fort Collins,co sos2s
r -
ATTA
CEMENT# 5
Unsafe Buildings -2007
(dangerous,unfit to occupy, and public nuisance)
1606 Banyan Dr. #2
Sewage backup; posted "Dangerous and Unfit to Occupy"; occupant ordered to vacate;
remediation completed.
1110 E. Lincoln
Abandoned, dangerous house; posted and ordered demolished;building removed.
621 W.Magnolia
Dilapidated bam; posted and ordered demolished;building removed.
3836 Manhattan
Vacant and open twin 4-plex; posted dangerous; failure to secure—summons issued;
• structure destroyed by fire; order to remove; asbestos testing;building removed;
foundation enclosed by chain-link fencing.
620 W. Oak
Dilapidated house; posted; ordered demolished; building removed.
1210 Remington
Foundation deteriorated in occupied house; posted;vacated; ordered to repair; conducted
inspection; additional repairs pending.
2101 Stover
Mouse infestation in occupied house;posted; vacated; ordered demolished;building
removed.
1908 Timberline Drive
Abandoned farmhouse and outbuildings vacant and open; posted; outbuildings remained
unsecured, open signs of vandalism; sent various notices, pending
525 N.Whitcomb
Occupied house unfit to occupy;posted; order to repair; vacated;pending demolition
permit
• 514 Wood (approximate address)
Dilapidated vacant cabin;posted; owner deceased, estate not settled; demolition pending.
Neighborhood and Building Services
PO Box Sao
City of FOIL C011ine Fort Collins,CO 80522
t _
ATTACHMENT #6
3836 MANHATTAN AVE. OVERVIEW
Owner: Mr. Jim Barnet
ADS Builders LLC
380 Interlocken Crescent Suite 770
Broomfield, Colorado 80021
Type: 8 unit multi-family(twin 4-plex)
Inspector: Derf Green,NBS Housing Inspector
• 7/16/07—Building Code Services Manager Mike Gebo directed me to investigate claims
that the building at 3836 Manhattan Ave. was open and unsecured. My inspection
determined that the doors to all 8 apartments were wide open. There was extensive
vandalism and damage inside the units, and signs of vagrancy and occupation. Those
signs included clothing, empty food packaging and beverage cans, clothing, sleeping
cots, etc. One of the toilets had been used repeatedly even though the water was not
running, and in one unit I found many soiled disposable diapers, (the size used for
newborns). I posted the building with inspector Sam Hancock.
7/23/07—Dangerous Building Notice sent to the owner, ordering the building to be
permanently secured within 1 week of the date of the notice. The notice stated that failure
to comply would result in a summons to Municipal Court being issued. The deadline for
securing the building was 7/30/07.
7/31/07—Inspected property—no change. The doors were still wide open, with more
signs of vandalism, vagrancy, graffiti, etc. There were sofas and a mattress in the parking
lot. The original Dangerous Building placards had been removed. I posted the building
again. Summons issued to owner for not securing building.
8/6/07—Inspected property—doors covered with sheets of OSB,but done poorly,
(minimum fasteners, open along edges to allow someone to pry off, etc.). (OSB is an
inexpensive type of plywood used for sheathing in new construction). The windows were
• only partially covered, leaving exposed glazing.
8/8/07—Contacted Mark Fiola with ADS Builders -told him to cover/secure the
windows or we would issue another summons.
8/10/07—Inspected property—window openings covered with scrap OSB, (poorly done,
very unsightly). I determined that a sheet of OSB covering one of the doors had been
pried off. The section of pipe that was used to pry the plywood off was still present.
Summons issued to owner for not securing building.
8/13/07—Inspected property—no change. Found 2 empty packages of antihistamine in
hallway, (possible drug use).
8/17/07—Inspected property— all doors properly secured with %Z"plywood. Plywood
was cut to inset into the door frames, was well secured with fasteners, and could not be
pried off. I inspected the property periodically after this date, and it remained secured.
10/5/07—Received notice from PFA that the property had burned down early that
morning, (apparent arson). Inspected with Mike Gebo and posted what was left of the
building.
10/10/07—Dangerous Building Notice/Order to Remove was sent to owner, ordering him
demolish the building,remove the debris, and clean the site.
11/15/07—Demolition began.
11/19/07—Inspected site—demolition completed, site cleaned up, and foundation
secured with perimeter fence. Case closed.
Attachment 7
• Minutes approved by the Board at the August 30,2007 Meeting
FORT COLLINS BUILDING REVIEW BOARD
Regular Meeting—July 26,2007
1:00E.M.
hai rson: Michael Smilie hone: 226-4260
until Liaison: Kelly Ohlson IlStaff Liaison:Felix Lee 221-6760
A regular meeting of the Building Review Board was held on Thursday, July 26, 2007 in the Council
Chambers of the Fort Collins Municipal Building at 300 LaPorte Avenue,Fort Collins,Colorado.
BOARDMEMBERS PRESENT:
David Carr
Alan Cram
Mike Gust
Gene Little
Jim Packard
Michael Smilie,Chair
George Smith
BOARDMEMBERS ABSENT:
• None
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Felix Lee,Neighborhood&Building Services Director
Delynn Coldiron,Contractor Licensing&Admin Services Coordinator
AGENDA:
1. ROLLCALL
The meeting was called to order.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Cram made a motion to approve the minutes from the June 28, 2007 meeting. Packard seconded
the motion. The motion passed.
3. Byron McGough,dWa Wattle&Daub:
Lee introduced this appeal. He noted that the appellant holds a Class E license with the City of
Fort Collins and explained that this license allows the holder to perform alterations to any
building or structure in the City,when such alterations do not include modifications to the
structural frame as defined in the building code and to construct,repair,or demolish(a)
detached structures such as shelters,storage sheds,playhouses,greenhouses, and gazebos;and
(b)unenclosed structures such as open carports,patio covers,open porches,and decks. Any
• such work is further limited to one story buildings or structures not exceeding two hundred
(200)square feet in floor area and which contain occupancies limited to those classified by the
building code as Group R.Division 3;Group S.Divisions 1 and 2;and Group U other than
private garages.
BRB July 26,2007 Pg.2
Lee noted that the appellant has the opportunity to perform a renovation in the existing basement
of a commercial building and that the work-involved some structural modifications which fall
outside of the scope of his license. Lee stated that according to the appellant's information,he
planned to work under the specific directives and observations of Richard S.Beardmore,a
licensed structural engineer and the project engineer for this job.
Lee mentioned that the appellant had done several jobs within the City of Fort Collins that have
been completed without incident,including commercial alteration and roofing jobs. Lee directed
the Board to additional project experience that had been noted in the appellant's information.
The Board heard testimony from the appellant,Byron McGough. After closing statements,the
Board discussed the information that was presented.
Gust made a motion to deny the appellant's request There was no second and,therefore,the
motion died Carr made a motion to approve the one-time exemption requested provided that
daily on-site supervision be provided by the appellant. Smith seconded the motion.
Vote:
Yeas: Carr,Packard,Little,Smilie,Cram,and Smith
Nays: Gust
4. Tim Kruse,dlb/a Gekko Building Services,LLC:
Lee introduced this appeal. He stated that appellant had applied for an HVAC license and
supervisor certificate and noted that all forms had been submitted with the exception of four of
the required project verification forms required by ordinance. Lee explained that the appellant
had noted in his information that he was unable to obtain the information required since his
records were unintentionally destroyed while in storage,as well as due to the fact that his
business contacts were no longer around. Lee added that the appellant passed the City's HVAC
exam on July 1,2004,scoring a 94%and then directed the Board to the resume of appellant's
experience,together with his proof of licensing in other jurisdictions,that was included in the
Board's packet
The Board heard testimony from the appellant,Tim Kruse. Alter closing statements,the Board
discussed the information that had been presented.
Little made a motion to approve the HVAC license and supervisor certificate requested with the
provision that the appellant pass the current HVAC exam prior to any permit activity,and that he
fulfill the requirement of four more completed projects(2 of which must be new construction)
within the next six months. Catr seconded the motion..
Vote:
Yeas: Carr,Little,Smilie,and Smith
Nays: Packard,Cram and Gust
5. Exterior Property Maintenance(Dangerous Building/Rental Housing Code Presentations:
Beth Sowder, Neighborhood Services Manager, gave a brief presentation on exterior property
maintenance codes. Mike Gebo, Building Code & Inspections Administrator, gave a brief
presentation on dangerous buildings and rental house codes.
• BRB July 26,2007 Pg.3
There was discussion on the information that was presented, suggestions offered, etc. Board
members were appreciative of the information that was shared.
6. Other Business
Board Member Gust requested that Felix review the Board's directive in the City Code. Felix
reviewed Section 2-117 in the City Code,outlining the Board's function.
Board Member Gust had some concern that the Board has become too lax in providing temporary
licenses to individuals who don't fully meet the requirements of the licensing ordinance. He was
concerned that the Board is not providing good service to the City and the Community by doing
this.
There was some agreement from other Board Members that Board decisions are too liberal and
that having a discussion related to this subject would be desirable.
It was mentioned that it is not so much the Board's purpose to deny a license,but to ensure that
those who are given one are a good contractor. There was concern that them needs to be some
balance so that there is support for the people who want to opportunity to work here.
It was mentioned that other contractors are finding ways to get the experience necessary to get a
license. There was some feeling that the City is not here to help people learn, but to make sure
that we have experienced contractors working in our City.
• Due to time, it was suggested that the Board have further discussion on this item at a future
meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 4:27 p.m.
Felix Let,Neighborhood&Building Services Mike Smilie,Board Chair
Director
•
• ATTACHMENT # 8
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING BOARD
MEETING MINUTES
281 N. College Ave.
Fort Collins, Colorado
September 6, 2007
Denise Rogers, Chair
Ken Waido,Staff Liaison, 970-221-6753
City Council Liaison: Lisa Poppaw
Board Members Present: Denise.Rogers, Jon Fairchild, Dan Byers, Pete Tippett,
Robert Sullivan, Marie Edwards, and Ben Blonder.
Board Members Absent: Ashley Monahan
Advance Planning Staff Present: Ken Waido
Council Members Present: None
• Board Chair Denise Rogers called the meeting to order with a quorum present at 4:00
p.m.
Welcome New Board Members
Marie Edwards and Ben Blonder were recently appointed by the City Council to fill
vacancies on the Board.
Open Public Discussion
Maryln Keller from the League of Women Voters reminded the Boarc of the bus tour of
Loveland's affordable housing projects to be held on September 17 from 8 AM until
Noon.
Approval of the Minutes of the July 12, 2007 Meeting
Robert Sullivan moved that the minutes of the July 12, 2007,meeting be approved. Dan
Byers seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously 7-0.
Proposed Property Maintenance Codes
Felix Lee, Neighborhood &Building Services Director, Beth Sowder,Neighborhood
• Administrator, and Mike Gebo, Building Codes Services Manager from the ..
Neighborhoods & Building Services Department attended the meeting and made
AHB page 3
presentations and answered questions on proposed ordinances to deal with Dangerous
Buildings, Property Maintenance, and Rental Housing Standards.
Staff presentation:
Exterior Property Maintenance
Focuses on exterior property maintenance related to:
Dirt/dead yards
Dilapidated fences
Excessive chipping/peeling paint
Deteriorated roofs and/or gutters
These items are not regulated by current codes
Recommendations
Property Maintenance Codes would:
• address &prevent neglected properties from deteriorating and
affecting entire neighborhoods
• be in the Nuisance Section(Sec. 20)of the Municipal Code
• Apply to all properties within the city limits
Current Concerns
No tools currently exist to address these exterior property maintenance
issues which could:
• Be detrimental to the well-being of neighborhoods
• Increase spread of neglect
• Cause further deterioration
• Ultimately result in dangerous premises
Need for Assistance
• Staff and Stakeholders agreed regarding the need for assistance programs
• Help those who cannot afford to make the repairs necessary to comply with
the codes
LaHIP
• Larimer Home Improvement Program (LaHIP) offers assistance to
those in need for some of the proposed codes.
• Low or no interest loans or grants to qualified people.
• LaHIP does not apply to dirt yards or deteriorated fences and only
applies to owner-occupied homes
AHB page 3
• Other people and agencies can fill this gap.
The Board of Realtors are already working in conjunction with a church to help
people in need.
The Group Workcamps Foundation
Staff will work to help resource supplies and volunteers.
Recommended Timeline
Year-long educational promotion in 2008 for adopted new codes prior to enforcement
& identify:
• where violations exist
• who needs financial assistance
• give people time to plan for improvements
• to figure out if the City needs to increase funding of LaHIP or
other assistance programs in 2009.
Begin regular enforcement in 2009
Council History and Next Steps
Council Work Sessions
— September 12, 2006
• — August 14, 2007
— Next Work Session scheduled for:
January 22, 2008
Board Questions and Discussion:
Jon Fairchild asked if the entire property would have to meet the standards or only what
is visible from the street. If alleys were included this would be a big deal. Jon stated that
several properties in his neighborhood would probably be identified as problems but
property values are rising in the neighborhood.
A: Just what is visible from the street.
Jon asked if old garages are included.
A: Just primary residences.
Robert Sullivan asked if the LaHIP program is just for owner occupied houses. If rental
units need improvements those improvement costs would be passed on to the renters.
Dan Byers asked about the penalties.
A: Penalties are not specific at this time. Likely will be a civil infraction. Notice will be
given with a time to comply. A graduated penalty fee of$100, $300,to $500 would
• follow, then criminal action could follow that.
AHB page 4
Staff presentation:
Dangerous Buildings Code
Dangerous Buildings defined in City of Fort Collins Code Chapter 5, Article II
Division 3: Unsafe, Dangerous or Nuisance Buildings, Structures, Equipment and
Premises
Replacing the 1976 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings
Scoping provisions,no change:
— Shall apply to all existing buildings and appurtenances, equipment,
facilities,utilities, accessory structures and the premises.
— Provides the City with a standard to be used in classifying any building,
structure, equipment and premise as dangerous, a nuisance or unfit to
occupy.
— Applicable when conditions endanger the life,health,property, safety or
welfare of the public or the occupants
— Provides the Building Official a legal process to require the repair or
abatement of buildings, structures and property declared"dangerous"
— Establishes responsibility of the owner and occupant
— Sets legal procedures for Notice of Violation and property posting
— Authorizes the City to abate the dangerous building or premise.
— Allows the City to assess property liens for cost of abatement.
— Establishes appeals and administrative review process.
Declaration of unfit to occupy due to:
— Lack of required hot or cold running water
— Lack of required adequate heating facilities
— Lack of required natural light and ventilation
— Excessive dampness in habitable rooms
— Lack of required sewage disposal
— Lack of required bathroom or bathing facilities
Declaration of dangerous (structural):
— Deteriorated or inadequate foundations
— Defective or deteriorated floor or roof structural supports
— Fireplaces or chimneys that list,bulge or settle due to defective material or
deterioration
Declaration of nuisance such as:
— Open vacant buildings that are attractive nuisance to children or vagrants.
AHB page 5
• — Whatever renders air, food or drink a health risk as determined by the
Health Officer.
— Defective or hazardous electrical,plumbing or mechanical(HVAC)
systems.
— Buildings or structures erected, altered or occupied contrary to law or
approved use.
— Buildings deemed unfit to occupy due to neglect or insect or vermin
infestation.
Proposed:
— Limit appeals to the Building Review Board of decisions by the Building
Official to any property owner or occupant within 800 feet of subject
property.
— Establishes that the exterior property can be declared dangerous
— Identifies emergency measures where imminent dangers exists.
— Establishes a program to monitor buildings vacant for more than 180 days.
Proposed: Mandatory Vacant-building Notification for:
A. `Boarded-up"buildings vacant more than 180 days, and
• B. Any vacant building with"break-in"activity.
Owner and local contact information must be provided.
Limits approval of vacant building status to one year intervals.
Requires City review process and periodic inspections of the property.
Sets procedures for securing of doors and windows against unlawful entry.
Requires monitoring of the property to maintain locked and secured perimeter.
Orders the Vacant-building Notification recorded with the Larimer County.
Sets penalties for failure to comply.
Proposed: Exterior premises dangerous,e.g:
— Broken or unsound fences and walls,
— Deteriorated barriers around swimming pools or spa,
— Property infestations of rodents, insects or vermin,
— Abandoned excavations or improper drainage that allows for stagnant
water,
— Broken or settled sidewalks and driveways.
Cost:
— Usually no more than 4-6 buildings declared dangerous at any given time.
— Investigation/follow-up currently absorbed in the daily Building Code
• Services operations.
— Cost for City to abate a dangerous building or condition is unknown.
AHB page 6
— Cost recovery through lien process untested.
Board Questions and Discussion:
Pete Tippet asked about lead based paint and asbestos?
A: State regulations come into play, a state permit is required for demolition.
Ben Blonder asked about the time frame for enforcement.
A: Actually buildings could remain vacant for many years.
Ben asked if enforcement is complaint driven.
A: Yes.
Dan Byers asked if there will be more properties identified because of the new code.
A: Yes, especially vacant buildings (e.g., the old Steeles Market on Mountain Avenue).
Staff presentation:
Rental Housing Code
City of Fort Collins Code Chapter 5, Article VI Division 2: Rental Housing
Standards
Proposed Revisions
Why Proposed Revisions?
— Council asked for review&recommendations.
— Current Rental Housing Standards not substantially changed since enacted
in1982 .
— Proposed revisions incorporate minimum habitability standards in effect
over the past 50 years.
Purpose& Scope
— To establish minimum standards regulating facilities,utilities,occupancy,
repair and maintenance of all rental housing in the City.
— To safeguard life,health and property of inhabitants.
Ventilation
Proposed:
— Exterior obstructions not allowed within 3 feet of openings
required for ventilation.
— Operable windows held open by window hardware.
— Doors and windows weather-stripped to limit air infiltration to
extent practical.
AHB page 7
• — Doors and windows used for ventilation of habitable rooms
would require screens from April 1 st to November 1 st .
— Bathrooms require mechanical ventilation to the exterior if no
openable window
Sanitation
Proposed:
— One water closet, lavatory and bathtub or shower for each four
sleeping rooms in"Extra-Occupancy Rental (boarding)
House".
— Prohibit carpeting or other absorbent floor finishes in wet and
food-preparation areas.
— Every water closet,bathtub or shower located in a room that
affords privacy.
Heating
Proposed:
— Increase minimum heating capability of permanent heating
• facilities for habitable rooms from 60 degrees to 68 degrees F.
Electrical
Proposed:
— GFI protected outlets in bathrooms
— Lighting requirements for hallways and stairways serving
multiple dwellings
— Minimum of two electric outlets in every habitable space in a
dwelling
Emergency Rescue
Proposed:
— All bedrooms below grade level (basements)have one escape
and rescue window with min. clear opening of 720 square
inches and a max. sill height of 48 inches above the floor.
Smoke Detectors
• Proposed:
ABB page 8
— All sleeping rooms and other locations as required by City
Building Code,have smoke alarms-operated by battery or
building electrical system.
Review and Appeal
Proposed:
Limit appeals to the Building Review Board of decisions by the
Building Official to any property owner or occupant within 800
feet of subject property.
Public Outreach Comments
Landlord provides snow removal and lawn care equipment.
Require security locks on doors and windows.
Landlord provides window shades for privacy.
Each rental have posted City ordinances. relevant to rental properties.
Require Carbon Monoxide alarms in rental units with natural gas
appliances
Board Questions and Discussion:
Robert Sullivan asked if this will require landlord licensing.
A: No,this is complaint driven.
Robert had an issue with including such things as no doors and carpets.
Ben Blonder asked about basement ingress/egress windows that could cost$3,000 to
$5,000.
A: That would depend on the year the basement was converted to include bedrooms.
Jon Fairchild made some general comments:
Dangerous Buildings—the phrase"contrary to law"is too open.
Rental Housing- Good idea, there is the need to protect life and health,but
including requirements like doors on bathrooms are not life and health issues, the
City needs to be more careful.
Property Maintenance—Getting to aesthetics is too subjective. Complaints can
come from grudge matches between neighbors, could create animosity.
Maintenance and lawn watering have associated costs. Basically against this part
of the code.
Budeetin¢for Outcomes (BFO) Process
AHB page 9
• Staff reviewed the City Manager's recommended budget to update the Board as to the
funding recommendations for the affordable housing related offers. Only the main
Affordable Housing offer was recommended for funding. The other offers (e.g., Land
Banking and Affordable Housing Fund enhancements)were not recommended for
funding.
Development Impact Fee Offset for Affordable Housing Projects
The Board has been discussing this issue for the past several months. Previously, staff
presented information requested by the Board on the amount of money in the City's
Budgets for affordable housing programs and the level of City Impact Fees for the last 10
years and provided information on the development of new affordable housing units in
the city and annual averages for ownership units (24.0 units/year) and rental units (136.0
units/year) and total (160.0 units/year) for the 1997-2005 period. No new construction
has occurred since 2005.
The Board reviewed a draft memorandum to the City Council prepared by Jon Fairchild,
Board Vice-Chair. Jon reviewed the history of this item for the new Board members.
Basically,how much funding should the memo request? The Board should point out that
the data justifies requesting$X,but the request is only for$Y. Jon was going to prepare
another draft for Board review and comment.
• Distribution of the 2007 Fall Competitive Process Affordable Housing Proposals
Staff distributed the affordable housing applications received by the City requesting
funding from the 2007 Fall Cycle of the Competitive Process. Staff also distributed
support materials, summaries, criteria scoring sheets, etc. The Board established the date
for a special meeting to formulate a list of funding priorities to be forwarded to the
CDBG Commission and the City Council for Thursday September 13 at 4:15 PM.
OTHER BUSINESS
Liaison Resorts
None.
Open Board Discussion
Staff reported that interviews for the Affordable Housing Planner position were to be
conducted on September 17 and 18. The process will include an opportunity for the
Board to meet the candidates.
The meeting adjourned at 6:00 PM.
•
Unsafe Buildings Code
Council Work Session
March 11 , 2007
Felix C . Lee , Neighborhood &
Building Services Director
Teresa Ablao , Assistant City
Attorney
1
Introduction
Staff proposes adopting the latest
version of the model International
Property Maintenance Code (IPMC)
as the basic template , plus local
amendments to update
and improve the current
" Dangerous Building Code " ;
2
and , for • to consider
adoption as early
April 15 , 20080
International Property Maintenance Code
( IPMC )
(all buildings , structures & premises }
Rental Housing
Standards Unsafe Buildings Code
( all rental ( all buildings, structures &
housing/ lodging ) premises
2
The proposed revisions would replace
the City's current 1976Edition of the
Uniform Code for the Abatement of
Dangerous Buildings (UCADB)
adopted in 1979 .
5
Revisions apply to :
all existing residential and
nonresidential buildings
including their exterior attachments,
premises and equipment .
6
The new provisions
are identified as
" Unsafe Buildings Code ".
7
Includes all buildings ranging in
conditions ( in order of increasing
hazard ) from :
Public Nuisance to
Unfit to occupy to
Dangerous
8
Council 's Direction
1 . Does Council concur with the
proposed revisions ?
➢ If not, does Council wish to review
additional provisions not included
in the changes or delete certain
provisions ?
9
Council 's Direction
➢ If not, does Council wish to retain
the current UCADB unchanged ?
10
Council 's Direction
2 . Does Council wish to consider
an ordinance adopting the proposed
amended IPMC addressing unsafe
buildings as soon as April 15 , 2008 on
First Reading or a different time
frame ?
11
Purpose
To protect, promote and enhance the
physical and economic health , safety,
welfare , and sustainability of our
community with respect to existing
buildings—occupied or vacant—
equipment , and premises .
12
Proposed changes to
improve current code by :
1 . Clarifying requirements are
applicable to all buildings &
structures ;
2 . Establishing a step - by- step
approach to determine the type of
unsafe building ;
13
Proposed changes to
improve current code by :
3 . Prescribing specific corrective
actions ; and
4 . Providing a clear distinction
between aesthetic/ appearance and
public nuisance unfit for
occupancy " & " dangerous ".
14
Proposed changes to
improve current code by :
5 . Mandatory "Vacant- Building
Notification " program
vacant for more than 180 days
or is entered illegally
15
• register the property for one -year
intervals ; provide contact information ,
owner continuously monitor the
building and keep building secured
from illegal entry .
16
Problem to Solve
Current adopted model code UCADB
is, by today 's standards, obsolete and
inconsistent with procedures for
dealing with buildings & premises
that are : a " public nuisance ", " unfit
to occupy ", and /or " dangerous
17
UCADB does not :
1 . clearly distinguish between
" dangerous " and " unfit to occupy" ;
2 . have an appeal process consistent
with Chapter 2 of the City Code
( appeals procedure ) ;
18
UCADB does not .
3 . provide a monitoring process for
IN vacant if or " abandoned " buildings
that have been entered illegally ;
4 . have adequate procedures for
responding to immediate hazards and
emergency situations ; and
19
UCADB does not .
5 . clearly address the " premises "
in addition to " buildings "
20
Background
Discussion about revising "" Dangerous
Building Standards " emerged during
initial discussions about general
Neighborhood Quality in the
community approx . 3 years ago .
Council discussed at two previous
Work Sessions — 9/ 12/ 06 & 8/ 14/ 070
21
Council direction 8/ 14/ 07 :
Council directed staff to clarify the
need , purpose , benefits and
corrective action process of the
proposed revisions, compare codes ,
as well as define conditions .
22
Examples of conditions :
Vtpublic nuisance"
conditions , if neglected , that could
endanger the life, health and safety of the
occupants or public include :
broken or missing steps ; leaking roof;
sagging gutters, porches, awnings ;
abandoned building with live electric ; and
23
Examples of conditions :
water stagnant more than 72 hours
breeding habitat for disease carrying
mosquitoes ; & severely dilapidated
fencing .
24
Examples of conditions :
"" Unfit to occupy" —
lack of adequate exits ; lack of required
operable heating equipment ; vermin
infestation ; inoperable sewage disposal
system ; excessive mold/ mildew ;
deteriorating foundation
25
Examples of conditions :
"" dangerous ""
— presence of explosives ; actual or
probable structural collapse ; leaking gas
appliances ; or arcing electrical service to
building .
" defined as " imminent danger" in the code
26
Procedures
in the packet are flow charts of step
by step procedures for addressing &
abating :
public nuisances
unfit to occupy
dangerous
27
Data
In 2007 , staff investigated 10 problem
properties . The violations ranged
from a Al publicnuisance " to unfit to
occupy " to the most severe
" dangerous " .
28
Violation examples — public
nuisance :
29
r
1 1
s�
0 ,.w
30
Violation examples — public
nuisance :
Leo
• y
31
Public Nuisance - corrected
m�(
f 1+�
1 •t •�Ii1L � _ :a
I. A.
'w. - t 32
Violations example — unfit to
occupy ( sewage backup ) :
33
Violation examples — unfit to
occupy vermin i nfested
1 ,
4
u-jj A
4
Violation examples - dangerous
l
�s
35
Violation examples —
dangerous :
Yh
0 '
- � y
-� � 36
One particular property exemplifies the
need for a preemptive process to identify
and monitor vacant/abandoned buildings
that are at risk of being entered
unlawfully . Potentially posing a significant
public danger to the surrounding
neighborhood .
37
3836 Manhattan Avenue
This property started its history with a
series of weed & rubbish violations in
2006 and early 2007 . By July 2007 , the
property was left unsecured , eventually
entered unlawfully & ultimately destroyed
by fire . All that remains today is the
remnants of the foundation , secured by a
chain link fence .
38
3836 Manhattan Ave
39
_ Lqi 40
..�� 41
ow
WP /
It
r
-� 42
M
� 1 ,
`-7-
44
Ir
Costs
Costs to the City : costs to administer the
proposed IPMCare anticipated to be
covered by current operating budget of
N BS .
If a significant increase in vacancies or
abandoned buildings ( i . e . as a result of
rising foreclosures) , more staff
resources would be needed .
46
Costs
Costs to the Property Owner :
expenses depend on extent of corrective
action — from roofing replacement to
demolition . Demolition estimates begin
around $ 5 , 000 ( 800 sq . ft . house )
47
Costs
Costs if City initiates abatement :
Initial cost would be borne by City, with
liens against property for full cost-
recovery .
To date, City has not contracted any
abatements .
48
Public Outreach
■ Planning & Zoning Board — 7/ 13/ 07
■ Open public meeting — 7/ 24/07
■ Building Review Board — 7/ 26/ 07
■ Affordable Housing Board — 9/ 6/ 07
■ North Fort Collins Business Assn . -
9/ 26/ 07
49
Public Outreach
• IBC Code Review Committee — 11 /8/07
• Fort Collins Board of Realtors — 1 / 15/ 08
• Building Review Board — 3/ 27/ 08
50
Public Outreach
response summary
• Generally favorable
• Concerns expressed :
— Vacant building notification
program and its effect on vacant
commercial buildings
— How vacant buildings in past on
North College were addressed
51
Council 's Direction
1 . Does Council concur with the
proposed revisions ?
➢ If not, does Council wish to review
additional provisions not included
in the changes or delete certain
provisions ?
52
Council 's Direction
1 . Does Council concur with the
proposed revisions ?
➢ If not, does Council wish to review
additional provisions not included
in the changes or delete certain
provisions ?
53
Council 's Direction
1 . Does Council concur with the
proposed revisions ?
➢ If not, does Council wish to review
additional provisions not included
in the changes or delete certain
provisions ?
54
PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE
BUILDINGS
3TWwCENfIrgMGig1
N16vMp WI11v WIIlOS
/r •9[CRir
II.<KNKVtf
Iworn! nary ea.
�UOG/dMlfNf UA��
IOIIIUONS I amsaMki IM
ecmre
NpRYMm Ig0comem MOLIiCigl
n miseroe
noaw mlecrto loauwcml Isl�cnol l mDllll
Iw�allr,. KATr sRcs/oue aVflONatG1IY
YIf/MIUONs /MR
iovrwnw RIOZD
roFRa�onm
28
PROCEDURE FOR PROPERTIES UNFIT TO
OCCUPY
(Condemnation)
STAFF RECEIVES NOTIFICATION
OF PROBLEM
VERIFY AND IDENTIFY
HAZARD(S) BY INSPECTION
(Sew, W, aeuim nt. sanitatlon,
eels. infestations. elo.)
POST BUILDING AS UNSAFE TO
OCCUPY
NOTIFY OMMER OF
coRRDcnoNs
PROBLEM CORRECTED NO CORRECTION
RE-INSPECTION SECURE FROM UNLAWFUL ENTRY
POSTING REMOVED TRACK AS VACANT
SAFE TO RE-0CCUPY UNLAWFUL ENTRY
ORDER DEMOJTIOWREMOVAL
PROCEDURE FOR DANGEROUS BUILDINGS
STAFF RECEVES NOTIFICATION
VERIFY MID IDENTIFY
HAZARDS) BY INSPECTION
IMMEDIATE DANGER AND
HAZNAT
ANY OCCUPANTS MUST VACATE
IMMEDIATELY
POST BUILDING FOR RISK OF
INJURY OR DEATH
NOTIFY UTIUTIES AND OTHERS
(Pu is Smim. Fim DWL. Mc.)
NOTIFY OWNER OF
CORRECTIONS
PROBLQA CORRECTED NOCORRECTION
REJNSPECTION DEMOUTIOWREMOVM
POSTING REMOVED
29