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