Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/12/2013 - EXTERIOR PROPERTY MAINTENANCE CODESDATE: March 12, 2013 STAFF: Beth Sowder, Mike Gebo Polly Lauridsen Pre-taped staff presentation: available at fcgov.com/clerk/agendas.php WORK SESSION ITEM FORT COLLINS CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION Exterior Property Maintenance Codes. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In response to citizen inquiries and discussions about on-going exterior property maintenance issues that create a negative impact on neighboring residential properties, staff researched existing deficiencies in current City Codes and what other communities use to address these challenging issues. Staff will present options to City Council to address the identified exterior property maintenance issues. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED 1. Does Council wish to move forward with any of the options presented? 2. Is there any additional feedback or direction Council would like to provide to staff? BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION In response to specific citizen complaints and inquiries about residential properties that appear unkempt, deteriorated, in disrepair and that create a negative impact to neighboring properties, staff researched whether current City codes are adequate to address the issues and whether other communities have codes that address the identified issues. Staff also documented properties in Fort Collins that currently have various exterior property maintenance issues that negatively impact their neighborhood, but are not in violation of current City codes. There are relatively few properties that meet this description, but these few properties (approximately a dozen) have significant impacts on their neighbors. These identified properties have been in deteriorating condition for several years, even decades in some cases. Some negative impacts that neighbors have expressed include: declining property values, loss of quality enjoyment of their property, safety hazards, unwanted wildlife and insects, and a general feeling that no one cares about their neighborhood. The identified exterior property maintenance issues include (See Attachment 1): • Vacant, boarded up buildings which have been declared “dangerous” • Owner-occupied properties with excessive exterior deterioration • Outdoor Storage accumulation visible from neighboring property • Storage of inoperable motor vehicles • Substantial amount of dead shrubs • Excessive accumulation of materials stored in public view (front or side yard) March 12, 2013 Page 2 • Repeat violations • Current Problem - Vacant Buildings Vacant buildings without a local contact person continue to get broken into and are not regularly maintained, creating an eyesore and safety issues. The City attempts to work with property owners (who may be located out of town/state) to keep the property secure and to require nuisance violations be corrected. Currently, there is no requirement for the owner of a vacant and declared “dangerous” building to have a local contact person who will routinely inspect the property and respond quickly to violations. Suggested Remedy Require vacant buildings that have been declared “dangerous” by Building Services to have a local contact person registered with the City who will be responsible for ensuring the property is secure and who will respond to any nuisance violations. Many other communities across the country have adopted Vacant Building Registries. • Current Problem - Owner-occupied Properties with Excessive Exterior Deterioration The International Property Maintenance Code (IPMC), as adopted, provides four classifications of buildings that would require some degree of correction. “Dangerous” is an imminent hazard to the occupants or the public; “Unlawful” is created without a permit or City approval; and “Unfit for Occupancy” is not allowed to be occupied due to a health risk. These first three classifications are applicable to all buildings and structures. The fourth classification, “Substandard”, means there are deficiencies that require general maintenance, but the building has not been declared “dangerous”. When adopting the IPMC, there was a specific exemption of residential properties that are owner- occupied or vacant from the Substandard classification. Some of the existing problems include owner-occupied or vacant homes with significant deterioration and holes in the roof and siding. Suggested Remedy Remove the owner-occupied exemption from the substandard portion of the exterior structures portion of the IPMC. Other communities that adopted the IPMC do not exempt owner-occupied properties from deteriorating exterior structures. • Current Problem - Outdoor Storage Accumulation Visible from Neighboring Properties Violations of the current Outdoor Storage Code (materials not normally stored outdoors in a residential neighborhood) only occur if the items can be seen from the public right-of-way or ground level of an abutting property. For example, if a neighbor can see the backyard of a neighboring property from their deck or looking out their window and the yard is full of materials, it would not be a violation unless it could also be viewed from public property or ground level of a neighboring property. March 12, 2013 Page 3 Suggested Remedy Modify the Outdoor Storage Prohibited Code to remove the requirement that it must be visible from ground level of a neighboring property. Other communities do not restrict this type of violation to items that are only visible from ground level. This change would make this Code consistent with other nuisance codes, such as rubbish and weed violations. Inspectors would only look from a neighboring property if a complaint was received and the complainant gave permission to the Inspector to view the violation from their property. • Current Problem - Storage of Inoperable Vehicles There is currently no limit to the number of inoperable motor vehicles that can be stored on a property, as long as they are screened from ordinary public view. This means that a fenced backyard can have any number of inoperable motor vehicles. Currently, City Code does not allow any inoperable motor vehicles to be stored in public view but does not restrict them when they are stored behind a fence. Suggested Remedy Modify the Storage of Inoperable Motor Vehicles Code to allow only one (1) inoperable motor vehicle to be stored behind a privacy fence. This would not apply to vehicles stored within an enclosed structure. Many other communities do not allow any storage of inoperable motor vehicles or limit it to one (1). • Current Problem - Substantial Amount of Dead Shrubs Currently, City Code does not regulate landscaping requirements on residential properties other than prohibiting dirt yards and overgrown weeds/grass. There are properties that have dead shrubs that create a potential fire hazard and an eyesore for neighbors. This could be subjective and it is difficult to define “dead or substantially dead”; however, other communities can be used as a model to follow. Suggested Remedy Add a provision that requires the removal of dead or substantially dead shrubs. This would apply to large shrubs or a substantial amount of shrubs (not just one rose bush, for example). This would not apply to trees. Many other communities require the removal of all dead/substantially dead landscaping, and their codes will be used as a model to follow. • Current Problem - Excessive Accumulation of Materials Stored in Public View There is no limit to the amount of materials and items that are normally stored outdoors in residential areas in public view (front or side yards). There are properties that have an excessive amount of materials stored in public view creating an eyesore for neighboring properties. March 12, 2013 Page 4 Suggested Remedy Amend the Outdoor Storage Prohibited Code to limit the excessive accumulation of items such as lawn and garden equipment, barbecue grills, bikes, ladders, etc. stored in public view (front or side yard). Staff would need to show that there is an “excessive accumulation” of items for it to be a violation. • Current Problem - Repeat Violations Due to the notification requirement in the Code, all violations (including repeat violations) must get a notice of violation and time to correct the violation prior to a citation being issued. This leads to continuous repeat violations since they can wait to receive a notice from the City and are allowed time to correct the violation before any penalties are assessed. Suggested Remedy For repeat violations (more than two of the same violation within a 12-month period), amend the Code to allow citations to be issued immediately. This will discourage repeat violations. This is currently allowed in the Code specifically for Occupancy violations. Public Outreach To date, public outreach has included articles in the Coloradoan and Neighborhood News. A focus group with neighbors who live near properties that have some of the identified issues, neighbors not directly impacted by these issues, and representatives from the Fort Collins Board of Realtors and the Northern Colorado Rental Housing Association was held to discuss the problems and potential solutions. Additionally, staff met with the Fort Collins Board of Realtors Governmental Affairs committee. Feedback included the following: • The order of importance for addressing the issues include: N Health/safety issues first N Repeat violations N Demonstrated adverse impacts to neighbors N Aesthetic issues last • Improve current enforcement processes to address the issues • Important to remove the owner exemption from the IPMC for exterior conditions of the buildings, limiting the amount of storage allowed on private property, and allowing citations to be issued for repeat violations without additional notices and time to correct the violation • Need to look closely at potential unintended consequences since Code changes would apply to all properties • Concern for people who may not be able to afford to maintain their home - provide education about existing assistance programs for large home improvement needs March 12, 2013 Page 5 Next Steps Additional public outreach will occur after direction is received from City Council. Updates to professional organizations and stakeholders will be given, and stakeholders will be encouraged to provide input and suggestions regarding the potential code changes. Staff plans to bring this item to City Council for formal consideration this summer, if Council chooses to move forward with any of the suggested Code changes. ATTACHMENTS 1. Identified Problems Matrix 2. Jurisdiction Comparison Matrix 3. Powerpoint presentation 1 Exterior Property Maintenance Codes City Council Work Session March 12, 2013 Beth Sowder, Neighborhood Services Manager Mike Gebo, Chief Building Official Polly Lauridsen, Code Compliance Supervisor ATTACHMENT 3 2 Direction Sought 1. Does Council wish to move forward with any of the options presented? 2. Is there any additional feedback Council would like to provide to staff? 3 Background Information 4 1. Repeat Violations Current Problem: • Notification requirement • Must get a notice of violation and time to correct prior to citation • Leads to repeat violations 5 Proposed City Code Amendment • Issue citations immediately for repeat violations • Repeat = more than 2 of the same violation within 12 months • Discourage repeat violations • Current practice for Occupancy violations 6 2. Vacant Buildings 7 Proposed City Code Amendment • Vacant and Dangerous Building Registry: – Require local contact person – Responsible for ensuring property is secured – Responsible for correcting violations • Other communities have adopted Vacant Building Registries 8 3. Owner-Occupied with Excessive Deterioration 9 10 11 Proposed Code Amendment • Remove owner-occupied exemption • Apply to exterior structures • Other communities have the IPMC without owner-occupied exemption 12 4. Viewable Outdoor Storage Violations 13 14 Proposed Code Amendment • Remove “visible from ground level” requirement • Consistent with other nuisance codes • Other communities do not have this requirement • Only for complaints 15 5. Inoperable Motor Vehicle Storage 16 Proposed Code Amendment • Allow the storage of only 1 inoperable motor vehicle • Would not apply to vehicles stored within an enclosed structure • Many other communities do not allow storage of inoperable motor vehicles 17 6. Dead Shrubs 18 Proposed Code Amendment • Require removal of dead shrubs • Would not apply to trees • May be difficult to define “dead or substantially dead” • Many other communities require removal of all dead landscaping • Use other codes as a model 19 7. Excessive Accumulation of Storage 20 Proposed Code Amendment • Prohibit an excessive accumulation of items • Could include: – Lawn and garden equipment – Barbecue grills –Bikes – Ladders • Apply to front and side yards in public view 21 Public Outreach • Coloradoan Article • Neighborhood News article • Focus Group • Meeting with Fort Collins Board of Realtors 22 Direction Sought 1. Does Council wish to move forward with any of the options presented? 2. Is there any additional feedback Council would like to provide to staff?