HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD Residential Building Resale Program Report PPT:it will I19110 IM ON 7.71 10 Oki i Y1 •l�Iel:��11 December S, 2016 BACKGROUND ❑ 1973- City established RBR Program ❑ State Performance Audit commissioned in 2015; completed in March 2016 ❑ April 4 = City Council review of Audit report; directed staff to study program options ❑ Aug 1 & Sept 6 = City Council Study Sessions - five program options presented ❑ November 7 = City Council review of staff recommendation to retain program with substantial changes CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION ❑ Retain RBR Program with City inspection component; return to Council for formal action ❑ Focus purpose on health/life-safety and unpermitted work, but eliminate redundancy with privately -commissioned inspection reports ❑ Create a clear resale inspection checklist to ensure consistent inspection practices ❑ Expand list of unpermitted work that would be "grandfathered" ❑ Expand time frame for correcting violations ❑ Establish appeal process ❑ Administer periodic amnesty + education comp PROPOSAL AMEND CITY CODE LJ Amend SRMC Chapter 12.36 (Attachment 1) ✓ Repeal current chapter + replace in its entirety ✓ Add a "purpose" section ✓ Update definitions ✓ Update prescribed contents of resale report ✓ Add section referencing administration of policies, practices and procedures ✓ Add appeal process PROPOSAL -ADOPT POLICIES, PRACTICES, PROCEDURES ❑ Adopt by resolution (Attachment 2) ✓Step-by-step procedures/process ✓ Inspection policies/practices ✓ Resale inspection checklist (Exhibit A) ✓ Unpermitted work given leniency ✓ Remedies + appeal process ✓ Amnesty + public education ✓ RBR fee refund policy for "clean" reports ✓ Add Notice of Compliance ✓ Post -adoption 6 -month review by Council PROPOSAL -AMEND FEE ❑ Adopt by resolution amendment to Master Fee Schedule (Attachment 3) ✓ Fee study updated- $270 for SFD resale report initially suggested; adjusted to $290 ✓ Adjusted fee of $255 for condo and $270 for multi -family (+ $30/unit after first unit) ✓ Add appeal fee- $100 RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ❑ Pass ordinance to print (Attachment 1) Ll Adopt resolution formalizing RBR Program policies, practices and procedures (Attachment 2) Ll Adopt resolution amending Master Fee Schedule to adjust RBR fees (Attachment 3) r�T� wr7H P �, 1. Eliminate Free -up staff time; No access to inventory; Fee eliminated. County of Marin Program 90% of CA = no resale no enforcement of Reduction in cost program unpermitted work recovery from pursuing unpermitted work 2. Continue Continued access to Fee increase per State Fee increase to $270 for Novato Current inventory to capture Audit; increase in cost SFD report Belvedere Program unpermitted work to customer Continued cost recovery Mill Valley for permits Ross Tiburon 3. Voluntary Same as #2 Extent/number of Same as #2 except ---- Program requests unknown amount of cost recovery unknown 4. Permit Record Limited staff required to Only administer; shorter process for customer 5. Continue Current Program but Limit Enforcement Continued access to inventory. Enforcement and correction of major violations Questionable value as records available on-line No capture of unpermitted work Unpermitted work would continue to be in violation; could discourage owner from securing permits for future work major violations = difficult to define ? Reduce fee to $130 for Corte Madera SFD report. Sausalito No capture of cost recovery for unpermitted work Fee increase to $270 for Larkspur SFD report; Fairfax San Anselmo DATA & STATISTICS ❑ San Rafael performed just under 700 RBRs per year over last 4 years. ❑ Roughly half of those have clean reports with no violations. ❑ More than 50% of inspections identify some level of unpermitted work. ❑ Over half of those are "major' in nature (require plans/zoning review/abatement) BENEFITS OF PROGRAM LJ Health and Safety LJ Unique service, not provided by others LJ Consumer benefit to the Buyers (seller pays) LJ Relatively high incidence of violations identified LJ Effective program is a strong disincentive to performing unpermitted work LJ Access to an aging housing inventory Ll In lieu of proactive Code Enforcement STAFF RECOMN4ENDATinN ❑ Value to retaining the program given history and pattern of unpermitted work ❑ State Auditor implicitly supported the program in all three cities selected for the study ❑ Privately -commissioned inspection reports do not report on permit history or code compliance ❑ Modify the current program retaining City inspection component with improvements RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS TO PROGRAM REVISE PROGRAM SCOPE & PURPOSE Eliminate redundancy with privately - commissioned Contractor's Inspection Reports (commissioned for near 100°0 of sales transactions) Focus on property permit record, citing/correcting unpermitted work REVISE REPORT& INSPECTION POLICIES & PRACTICES ✓ Eliminate Section A of resale report (covered by private inspection report) ✓ Broaden list of unpermitted work that would be "grandfathered" (no retroactive permit required) ✓ City inspectors take photos to support record (recommended by State Audit Report) ✓ Continue to waive permit fees/penalties for "double jeopardy" ✓ Revise Section C of resale report to provide better direction/information to customer on pursuing remedies/corrections ✓ Develop and adopt a specific checklist of what the City inspector will/will not inspect (Attachment 6) RECOMMENDED PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS ✓ Establish an appeal process (recommended by State Audit Report) ✓ Extend time period for correcting unpermitted work from 60 days to 180 days ✓ Extend time period for addressing "double jeopardy" from 60 days to 365 days ✓ Streamline process for customer by having one contact in Building Division to work with seller/buyer ✓ Establish an amnesty program (bi-annually) for owners to obtain retroactive permits w/out penalties ✓ Use regular/fixed-term employees to conduct inspections instead of temp/seasonal employees INCORPORATE AN EDUCATION COMPONENT ✓ Prepare and post an informational handout and video "How to Prepare for an RBR nspection" ✓ Post the inspection checklist (Attachment 6) v/ Update "FAQ" on City website ✓ Continue to host annual "Coffee & Codes" for real estate professionals and public FEE ADJUSTMENTS ✓ Adjust RBR fee application fee to $270.00 for single-family residence Based on Cost Study Comparable to fee charged by other Marin jurisdictions ✓ Establish and appeal fee= $100.00 ✓ Suggest a 100% fee refund for properties not cited for violations or corrections Estimated revenue loss of $60K annually SUGGESTIONS CONSIDERED BUT NOT RECOMMENDED ❑ Ignore or dismiss "double jeopardy" ❑ Focus inspection for correction of violations on most significant health +life/safety issues only ❑ Grandfather older, unpermitted room additions that pose no health +life/safety issues ❑ Allow privately -commissioned inspection reports in -lieu of City inspection ❑ Make inspection component of program optiona REQUESTED ACTION ❑ Accept public comment and discuss ❑ Direct staff to prepare code amendments to SRMC Chapter 12.36 and Master Fee Schedule (Ordinance) ❑ Direct staff to prepare a Resolution adopting RBR Program policies and practices for reporting and inspections ❑ Require a 6 -month status report to City Council following adoption FEE STUDY TIME Permit Tech. Process/open application 0.25 $90 $22.50 Admin Asst. Permit history; base report 0.65 $87 $56.55 prep; coordinate with applicant; schedule inspections RBR Inspector Perform field inspection; enter 1.25 $115 $143.75 results into report Admin Asst. Proof and finalize report; post 0.3 $87 $26.10 report; contact customer Management Meet with customer when 0.06521 $160 10.43 staff issues are in dispute Overhead (vehicle gas, supplies, $11.00 etc.). TOTAL: $270.33 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS ❑ Current program brings in approximately $117,000 annually in fees (cost recovery) ❑ Part time RBR inspector costs approximately $35,000 annually ❑ Recovered permit/inspection fees for unpermitted work are approximately annually (including penalty fees). $3251000 FACTORS TO CONSIDER ❑ Current program provides a strong disincentive to perform illegal work -- benefits the construction and design businesses. ❑ High incidence of unpermitted work— potential for health and safety risks to that property and neighboring properties. ❑ Helps to identify many illegal legalize them. Other benefits preservation. units, and often for neighborhood FACTORS TQ CONSIDER LJ Consumer protection by ensuring that all residential im :)rovements are ultimately inspected anc. safe for the new home purchaser LJ Difficult to justify suspending the grogram based the very high incidence of i legal activity being identified. LJ Whatever San Rafael does could impact other jurisdictions in the county. LJ Others in the community are supportive of the LJ Recovery of permit fees for unpermitted work helps to keep permit fees lower for all. STAKEHOLDERS ❑ Marin Association of Realtors = support for Option 4 (some supporting Option 1) LJ Marin County Tax Assessor = support for Option 2 ❑ Marin Builder's Association = support for ❑ Fire Department + Emergency Responders ❑ Local Architects/Designers ❑ Citizens who lawfully obtain permits ❑ Other Marin jurisdictions Option 2 ❑ Contractors State License Board & State DOJ