Loading...
2500 Planning - Report Regarding Prolonged Building Projects• STATUS REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. Planning Director Ungar presented the staff report providing background regarding the matter of prolonged building projects. She indicated that the City of San Marino has not enforced the fee penalty provision of their Ordinance and that the Rolling Hills Community Association is in the process of formulating a building permit agreement. After receiving and filing the report, Mayor Heinsheimer requested that staff keep the City Council informed on this subject. NEW RI Teuurcc • '_fl- aa. STATUS REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. City Manager Nealis presented the staff report providing background regarding the City of San Marino's lack of experience to date with the Ordinance relating to prolonged building projects. He reported that the Rolling Hills Community Association considered requiring a Building Permit Agreement which is currently being reviewed by the Association's legal counsel. • Mr. and Mrs. John • Heater, 59. Eastfield Drive, expressed concern about a building project that -has been ongoing for some time on an adjoining property. Hearing. no: further discussion or objection, this item was continued and staff was directed to return with a status report in six months regarding the efforts of the City of San Marino and the- Rolling Hills Community Association on this subject. Staff was also directed to ask the City Attorney to contact'the Community Association Attorney to discuss the status of the Community Association on this subject. NEW BUSINESS CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. L � G,. City Manager Nealis presented the staff report. Councilmembers discussed the report. Mayor Pro Tem Hill reported that this matter has been discussed at the RHCA Board of Directors meetings. 7 Staff was directed to present another status report in six months on the efforts of the Rolling Hills Community Association and the efforts of the City of San Marino on this subject. Coco\ obb C(paecD 300- 005 P\ckene kr. o:cecN°c CL,Q(;) 3o00- o�‘` CONSIDERATION OF REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. City Manager Nealis presented the staff report providing background regarding this issue. Assistant City Attorney Ennis presented an explanation of the San Marino Ordinance, administrative procedures and penalties. Discussion ensued regarding the RHCA review of a Resolution relating to this matter. The City Council concurred that the City should monitor the outcome of the RHCA review before considering any action. Councilmembers also discussed the provisions outlined in the City of San Marino's Ordinance and the problems that may occur in enforcing such an Ordinance. Staff was directed to return with a report at a future City Council Meeting regarding RHCA Board action on this subject, the history/philosophy of the City of San Marino Ordinance and its implementation in that City. 'i� ,�"zck a.4,0 ',�r�x PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING ABANDONED PROJECTS. Those in attendance discussed the City's procedures outlined in the staff report. RHCA Board Members expressed their concern for the visual impact of projects that have been abandoned. RHCA Board Members commented on what the RHCA could possibly do to influence property owners to complete projects. • C1, `r2 Pfin 9 ate INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityotrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 3.d. Mtg. Date: 4/24/2000 DATE: APRIL 24, 2000 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. BACKGROUND This report is an update of similar reports related to prolonged building projects brought before the City Council on October 27, 1997, February 9, 1998, and August 24, 1998, March 8, 1999, and September 13, 1999. Staff was directed to follow the implementation of a City of San Marino ordinance and review the progress of the Rolling Hills Community Association in this regard. Councilmembers requested that staff study the issue of prolonged building following the receipt of the attached letter and the appearance of Mr. and Mrs. John Heater at the meeting regarding the Juge property at 61 Eastfield Drive that has been under construction since January "1988. A copy of the previous staff report material is attached. UPDATE To date, the City of San Marino has not enforced the fee penalty provisions of their Ordinance. Planning Director David Saldana reports that he has extended building permits after valid reasons for the delay were provided in. writing. Mr. Saldana has had two requests for extensions ranging from 3 to 6 months. In both cases, the applicants completed their work in the permitted time period. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 1 ®Printed on Recycled Paper. The Rolling Hills Community Association considered and adopted a resolution requiring a Building Permit Agreement between the owner and the Community Association. At this time, an agreement form is being formulated by Community Association Attorney, Mr. Sid Croft. No implementation has actually occurred. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that staff report to the City Council on this subject in six months. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 2 dry ` 120 lf•,.S INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 1999 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 7.C. Mtg. Date: 9/13/99 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL J ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. BACKGROUND This report is an update of similar reports related to prolonged building projects brought before the City Council on October 27, 1997, February 9, 1998, and August 24, 1998, and March 8, 1999. Staff was directed to follow the implementation of a City of San Marino ordinance and review the progress of the Rolling Hills Community Association in this regard. Councilmembers requested that staff study the issue of prolonged building following the receipt of the attached letter and the appearance of Mr. and Mrs. John Heater at the meeting regarding the Juge property at 61 Eastfield Drive that has been under construction since January 1988 (more than 11 years). A copy of the previous staff report material is attached. UPDATE To date, the City of San Marino has not enforced the fee penalty provisions of their Ordinance. Planning Director David Saldana reports that he has extended building permits after valid reasons for the delay were provided in writing. Mr. Saldana has had two requests over the past 6 months for extensions ranging from 3 to 6 months. In both cases, the applicants completed their work in the permitted time period. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Parer. The Rolling Hills Community Association considered and adopted a resolution requiring a Building Permit Agreement between the owner and the Community Association. At this time, an agreement form is being formulated by Community Association Attorney, Mr. Sid Croft. No implementation has actually occurred. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that staff report to the City Council on this subject in six months. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 2 Cityof Rotting i[[a INCORPORATED JANUARY 211, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF, 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 (-malt cNyoMiipaoLccm Agenda Item No.: 9.B. Mtg. Date 10/27/97 DATE: OCTOBER 27,1997 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. BACKGROUND At the September 22, 1997 City Council meeting, Councilmembers requested that staff study the issue of prolonged building projects. This action followed the receipt of the attached letter and the appearance of Mr. and Mrs. John Heater at the meeting regarding the Juge property at 61 Eastfield Drive that has been under construction since January 1988 (almost 10 years). The Heaters referred to the attached newspaper article about the City of San Marino's Ordinance pertaining to deadlines for construction projects. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS The majority of new residential construction projects in the City of Rolling Hills are rarely completed within a two year window due to the large estate -size residences proposed that usually take.. longer than two years to complete. During the construction period, projects are sometimes prone to scheduling difficulties as a result of weather conditions or financing. ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION The Rolling Hills Community Association has been considering the attached draft resolution for some time that is entitled, A RESOLUTION TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. The draft resolution addresses future adverse aesthetic and safety impacts of major construction projects that exceed $250,000. The resolution as proposed requires that the property owner and Association agree on a Substantial Completion Date and that the property owner provide a completion bond so that the Association can make claim for the completion bond or liquidated damages. The Community Association will review the proposed resolution again on October 23, 1997 and staff will update the City Council of any Community Association action taken at their meeting. CITY OF SAN MARINO San Marino's Ordinance has been reviewed and will be addressed by City Attorney, Michael Jenkins. We inquired and received the attached information from Ms. Carol' A. Robb, City of San Marino City Clerk. The City of San Marino adopted Ordinance No. 097-1107 on September 10, 1997 requiring that construction projects be completed within certain time limits in accordance with valuations and subject to penalty fees if a project is not completed within those time limits. The time limits range from a 6 month completion time for valuations up to $50,000 and a 15 month time limit for valuations over $250,000. Penalties imposed range from $100 up to $1,000 per infraction (i.e., misdemeanor infraction). There is no Community Association in the City of San Marino. NEARBY CITIES The City of Rolling Hills Estates requires that projects commence within 6 months of approval. They do not have any prolonged projects but, the city could dedare a prolonged project substandard and require it to be demolished or completed. This usually represents a lengthy process that may lead to litigation. Planning officials in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are in the process of formulating an amendment to the municipal code to enforce deadlines on projects. We will monitor this and provide updates as necessary. The City of Palos Verdes Estates applies a certain amount of working days to a particular project which may be extended by staff for six months for one time only. Further extensions may be established by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 2 I11� lealet SEP 2 1997 CITY OF RC _L:. :: MIS By 12 September, 1997 City Council, City of Rolling Hills: Board of Directors, Rolling Hills Community Association Dear Friends: Please note an article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12th. 1997 regarding the action some local cities are taking about prolonged building projects. The Juge property next door to us. at 61 Eastfield Drive has been going on for ten long years. This has presented us with a very ugly, unpleasant and aggravating situation. It certainly does not seem to be in keeping with the high standards of life in this lovely community. We sincerely hope that the Board of Directors will see fit to enact some sort of ordinance concerning a time limit for construction projects in this City. Perhaps you will want to communicate with the City Council of San Marino to find out how they are proceeding on this issue. sincer.y, l�-BUP.w to.' N da.„. • !! e 8011 title 110111 bills a 11114 loot (3111111-1141 office (3111144.1111 ROLLING MILLS REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Offered by John and Doreen Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive From our point of view, it's not the same Rolling Hills we moved to in 1956! The condition that has affected our view for over ten years is the excessively prolonged house -building ordeal next door to us to the south. We haw lived with the noise, the dust, the general disruption all this while. It has not been pleasant. This debaucic has certainly affected our property value. And others up and down Eastfield Drive. Here is a brief list of the problems we have experienced: Violation of easement rights: Initial placement of a hurricane fence crossed over the easement entrance Plan included a planting in the middle of the easement entrance Now driveway down the easement has been elevated to the extent that an access pathway to our rear lower level is impossible to use,— too steep. Wall built into our easement and property, necessitating our having a survey to prove the encroachment. Tractor work on Sundays Auto parking in the easement (his driveway) The first and foremost problem - approval of such incompatible plans given the size of the building pad. Now, we believe there are solutions for our problems, and all others hie them in the City. We refer you to the clipped article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12 regarding actions enacted by San Marino to correct just exactly these sorts of neighborhood control problems. Why cannot Rolling Hills control the building projects whithin the city? Each time we have complained about the excessive construction time we are advised the matter is out of the city's hands - the County governs. This certainly seems to be a "cop-out", sacrificing our authority to govern what occurs in our city to an outside bureaucracy. Is there a conclusion to this problem? Yes! Pass time limit laws on construction projects It is in the hands of our local elected officials. Sincerely, ti A M ilIDAY. SEPTEMBER IL 11,7 • EWS IN BRIEF A summary of developments across Los Angeles County Law Imposes Time Limit on Construction Projects The City Council. tired of con- struction projects that leave neigh- bors enduring noise. dust and un- sightly tote for years, has enacted a law that levies fines for failure to complete work within a designated The city is among the first in the San Gabriel Valley to impose a timetable for builders. Under the law. approved by the council late Wednesday. a property owner would have six months to ete a A00 project. N month for 81000000 protect andayear to finish. a X0,000 project. The fine for • running over schedule would be double the coat of the initial build- ing permit. officials aaia Bell said • sty Manager mounting complaints about a handful of projects around the dty led officials to make the change. One Muse remodeling project has dragged on for three years, longer than any other residenUal project in the city. Rests say a number of sites in the city seem to be pmt homes for work crews. concrete mixers and dozens of trucks. Many cities require only that builders show work is conm` every to get a new building per six month& Pasadena officials are conaider- ing a similar law. Residents of the South San Rafael Avenumassivein Pasadena have protested make -over of a mansion that But lasted nearly seven Pasadena building officials said an- other project In the San Rafael , Hills has lasted two decades as one man has single-handedly remod- eled a home. • J TITLE OF RESOLUTION: TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. Purpose: To avoid the considerable future adverse aesthetic and safety impact on the Community Association and its members caused by the failure to complete construction of buildings within a reasonable time period. Definitions: For the purpose of this Resolution the phrase "Substantial Completion" shall mean that all exterior construction, roofing, painting, glazing, and other finishing called for on the building's approved plans have been completed so it appears from the outside as completed, together with installation of all approved hardscape. and landscaping, irrigation systems, and removal of temporary fencing, power, and. sanitation. The "Substantial Completion Date" shall mean the date the project is Substantially Completed as defined herein. "Major Construction" shall be interpreted to mean any residential or ancillary new or remodel building project involving an estimated cost exceeding $250,000, which in the opinion of the Association, involves construction work visible by neighbors or from Association roadways or trails. Resolved That: It shall be the policy of the Association as to all Major Construction to require as part of the permitting process that the Owner and the Association mutually agree to a reasonable Substantial Completion Date for the proposed improvements to reach the stage of Substantial Completion and to establish either the time and amount of a completion bond to be purchased by applicant in a form and amount satisfactory to Association, or the monthly amount which reasonably equals the liquidated damages to the Association and the members caused by a failure to Substantially Complete the improvements by the Substantial Completion Date. Failure to Substantially Complete by i the Substantial Completion Date shall constitute a "Default" permitting Association to make claim against the completion bond or for the liquidated damages. The amount per month of liquidated damages shall be prorated on the basis of a 30 -day month for partial months and such amounts due the last day of each month and shall bear interest at 10% simple interest from the month -end of accrual until paid in MI. Provided however, in the event of a Default, the Owner shall have an additional 45- calendar day "Grace Period" within which to cause the improvements to be Substantially Completed and if the Owner achieves Substantial Completion within the Grace Period, the Association's rights and claims hereunder will be waived, but failure to achieve Substantial Completion within the Grace Period shall result in the Association's claims against the bonding company or for liquidated damages to be measured from the first date of Default. Upon written request and documentation supporting same filed by Owner, the Board in its sole discretion may grant one or more, but not to exceed 60 -day extensions, to the Substantial Completion Date due to unforeseen delays determined to be caused by Acts of God or other special unforeseeable circumstance, subject to such conditions as the Board may reasonably impose as a material part of such an extension. However, insufficient construction funds and/or failure of a contractor to perform its obligations shall generally not be considered a basis for extending the Substantial Completion Date. The Board may enforce its rights hereunder in the same manner as any other delinquent assessment against. a Homeowner, including filing, and foreclosure upon, its lien for amounts due plus interest provided herein. CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM fit AGENDA ITEM To MAYOR FILUTTB AND MEMBERS OF TIM CITY COUNCIL FROM : 1 r1 • AVID A. SALDAfA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE SEPTEMBER 10, 1997 SUBJECT ORDINANCE NO. 0971107.2nd Reading RE:11IM/1MUM TIME LIMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS BACKEROLEDI On August 13, 1997, Council approved on first reading, Ordinance No. 097-1107. This pertains to the establishment of a maximum time limit for the completion of construction projects. According to the ordinance a property owner will be subject to the payment ofpenalty fees by ttie City if work is not completed within a specific period of time. The deadlines vary in relationship to the project's valuation. For example, a project under $50.000 in valuation would be required to be completed within the (6) months, A (1 project having a valuation greater than $250.000 would be required to be completed within fifteen (15) months. Additionally. a provision would authorize the Planning and Building Director discretion to grant an extension to the required completion date if the project has been delayed beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Violations would be enforced and penalties imposed In the same manner as violations of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. =COMMENDATION; Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on second reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment Ordinance No. 097-1107 etap6t ap :f iv1..:1.i (..•*e ,�, :.tjl..h'CII_ ,11-y or ;AN MiAli;N(-) a3 ex.) 41 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR FILUTZB AND MEMBERS OP THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDA1A. DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT v AUGUST 13. 1997 AGENDA ITEM ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107_ 1st Reading CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COMPLETION DEADLINES BACKGROUND: Last month, staff presented the City Council with a proposed ordinance that would place time limitations on conuncrcial and residential construction projects. This proposal is a result of an increased number of resident complaints regarding the excessive period of time that some property owners take in completing a construction project. The main example is 770 Chaucer where this remodeling project has taken over 2 IA years and has not been completed. The residual noise. debris, traffic, and overall unattractiveness of building projects can only be tolerated within a reasonable time period by surrounding residents from a project The City Council was in agreement with the concept of this ordinance following further amendments by the City Attorney. The amended ordinance is attachedfor your consideration. ggCOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO AMENDING THE SAN MARINO CITY CODE REGARDING THE TIME WITHIN WHICH PROPERTY OWNERS MUST COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION Property owners sometimes take an excessively long period of time to complete a construction project; and WHEREAS, delayed completion of construction for unreasonably long periods of time subjects neighboring property owners to unnecessary adverse impacts from construction noises and unsightlinece caused by dead landscaping and storage of construction materials, equipment, trash, and portable toilets; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to encourage development projects that improve the appearance of properties and maintain high property values, but wants to prevent unreasonably lengthy construction projects that negatively affect surrounding properties; and to protectWHEREAS, establishing a reasonable neighborhoods from the completion date for construction projects is necessary impacts of lengthy projects. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 of Article 01, Title XXV of the San Marino City Code are renumbered as Sections 25.01.06 and 25.01.07, respectively, and new Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 are added to Article 1 of Title XXV to read as follows: 25.01.04 COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. Unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 25.01.05, each person owning property for which a building permit has been issued pursuant to Article 2 of Title XXV of the San Marino City Code shall cause all work authorized by said permit to be completed within the time limits specified below from the date of issuance of the building permit; VALUATION PROJECT COMPLETION TIME Up to $50,000 $50,001 to $100,000 $100,001 to S250,000 $250,001 and over 6 months 9 months 12 months 15 months The valuation shall be the same valuation determined by the Building Official upon issuance of the building permit. 4. CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 PAGE TWO 25.01.05: EXTENSION OF COMPLETION DATES. TheDirectorof Planning and Building may grant an extension of s completion date established pursuant to Section 25.01.04 if the Director finds that the project has been performed as expeditiously as reasonably possible and um a owner to reasonably accommodate the needs of persons residing in the neighborhood and that the delay in completion of construction was beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Decisions of the Director on whether to grant an extension may be appealed to the Pluming Commission and from the Planning Commission to the City Council. Applications for an won must be submitted no earlier than two months prior to the expiration date and no later than one month prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Section 01.06.01 of Article 6 of Chapter of the San Marino City Code is. amended to read as follows: 01.06.01: SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following sections of the San Marino City Code: a) 23.06.13; and b) 25.01.04. Section 3: The second paragraph of Section 01.06.13 of Chapter I of the San Marino City Code is amended to read as follows: If the violation is a continuing violation of Section 25.01.04 or of the building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of September, 1997. PAUL CROWLEY, VICE MAYO ATTEST: CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK I CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO.097-1107 PAGE THREE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 097-1107 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting of the City Council held on the 10th day of September, by the following vote: AYES NOES ABSTAIN ABSENT s.Avsp61VnAcedo971.107 COUNCILMEMBERS BROWN, COTTON, DRYDEN, . AND VICE MAYOR CROWLEY. NONE. MAYOR FILUTZE. NONE. c 0. -fib CAROL A. ROBB. CMGAAE CITY CLERIC CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM TO FROM • DATE SUBJECT ORDINANCE NO. 097-110/, PYRE READING LEIZESPAKDEBEILIMIGMIMS MAYOR COTTON AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDANA. DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT JULY 9. 1997 BACKGROUND; This item has been continued from the meetings of April 9th. June 1 lth, and lune 21st. The proposed ordinance pertains to amending Chapter 25- Uniform Coder and Me Prevention of the City Code. The amendment would do the following: • Establish a required project completion date based upon project valuation and date of building permit issuance. • Establish a penalty fee for projects exceeding the required project completion date This ordinance has been originated because of the increased number of complaints received from irate neighbors of construction projects. They feel that they are unreasonably inconvenienced by property owners who take an unusual amount of time to complete construction projects. An example of such a project is at 770 Chaucer Road. This project has taken 2 K years and has not yet been completed This project is an example where as owner has extended the project by calling for inspection right before the 180 -day expiration deadline on various phases of the project. A deterrent to lengthy projects. proposed by this ordnance. is a required project completion deadline. Staff proposes a deadline based upon butldng valuation. A small project should be completed sooner than a large project. Although a large project should be given more time than a small one. the City should require its completion not to exceed say fifteen months. Council should take the liberty to suggest more or less time based on what seems reasonable. As suggested by Councihaember Fdutze. kitchen remodels and other similar projects should not be subject to these restrictions. As such. staff has amended the ordinance by exempting all such interior projects_ Finally. a penalty fee should be imposed if an owner exceeds the required project completion deadline. Proposed is to require fees to be paid in accordance with the civil enforcement procedures in Article 6 of Chapter 1 established last year with the tree preservation ordinance. This ordinance will not be effective unless the public is properly made aware of its existence. Staff intends to work closely with the San Marino TYibune to distribute information regardng this subject. Also. a 1 counter sign will be prepared and displayed. Staff is also working on a.handout to accompany the issuance of all building permits that will not only cover this issue but also outline allowed construcdon hours. These would be in addition to the Guidelines for the Maintenance of Conduction Sites. Additionally, staff will send notices warning owners before their permits expire. REMIESDINDATENSU Staff recommends that the City Council approve on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 C.14nt.eztA.ma lAndWg -t tom \WI 2 C O V E R FAX S H E E T To: City of Rolling Hits - ATTN: Lola Unger Fax 11: (310) 377-7288 Subject: City of San Marino Ordinance No. 097-1107 - Penalties For Violations Date: September 22, 1997 Pages: 10, including this cover sheet. COMMENTS: Lola: Please find attached a copy of City of San Marino Ordinance No. 096-1088 which establishes the administrative procedures and penalties for violations of the City Code, and which the City references in Ordinance No. 097-1107 pertaining to the time within which property owners must complete construction. Section 2 of Ordinance No. 097-1107 concerning Section 01.06.01 of Article.6 of Chapter 1 of the San Marino City Code also refers to violations of sections 23.06.13 and 25.01.04. You will also find copies of these sections of the City Code attached for your information. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me. From the desk o►... CAROL A. ROBB. CMCJAAE City Clerk City or Sean Madre 2200 Huntington Ddv. San Mahn, CA 91100 (628) 300-0705 Fax (628) 300-0700 • I_ • 1 1 1.1I JI ..• .........V - - 1 ORDINANCE NO. 086-1048 AN ORDINANCE OF TEE CITY OF BAN MARINO EBTAHLIBRING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF TEE CITY CODE OF BAN KARZNO AND AMENDING TEE BAN' MARINO CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Article 06 of Chapter I of the City Code of San Marino is added to read as follows: 01.06.01 SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following section of the San Marino City Code: 23.06.13. 01.06.02 DEFINITIONS: The following words and phrases, when used in the context of this Article, shall have the following meanings: A. ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of the San Marino City Code. B. LEGAL INTEREST: Any interest that is represented by a deed of trust, quitclaim deed, mortgage, judgment lien, tax or assessment lien, mechanic's lien or other similar instrument, which is recorded with the County Recorder. C. RESPONSIBLE PERSON: Any person who an Enforcement Official determines is responsible for causing or maintaining a public nuisance or a violation of the City Code or applicable state codes. The term "Responsible Person" includes but is not limited to a property owner, tenant, person with a Legal Interest in real property or person in possession of real property. 01.06.03 AUTEOAITY: Any person violating any section of this Code that .is subject to this Article may be issued an administrative citation by an Enforcement Official as provided in this Article. 01.06.04 PENALTIES: An administrative penalty shall be assessed by means of an administrative citation issued by the Enforcement Official, and shall be payable directly to the City Treasurer. Penalties shall be collected in accordance with the procedures specified in this Article. 01.06.05 CONTINUING VIOLATIONS: It shall constitute a new and separate offense for each and every day, or portion thereof, during which a violation of, or failure to comply with, any provision or requirement of this Code is committed, continued, or permitted by any person. The time period for computing the number of days a violation has continued for 960131 S7130-00001 tpp 1330869 0 purposes of this Section shall commence on and shall include the data of service of the Administrative Order, the date the Administrative Order otherwise provides, or for continuing violations of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning codes, 30 days following receipt of service of the Administrative Order, whichever date is applicable pursuant to Section 01.06.14. 01.06.06 PROCEDURES POR ISSUING ROIMMIBTRATIVE CITATIONS: Upon discovering a violation of any section of this Code that is subject to this Article, an Enforcement Official may issue an administrative citation, on a form approved by the City Manager, to a Responsible Person, as follows: A. If the Responsible Person is a corporation, the Enforcement official shall attempt to locate any one of the following individuals and issue to that individual an administrative citation: the president or other head of the corporation, a vice-president, a secretary or assistant secretary, a treasurer or assistant treasurer, a general manager, or a person authorized by the corporation to receive service of process in a civil action. If the office address of any of the above -listed individuals is known to the City, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to one of those individuals by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that vas sent by regular mail is not returned. B. If the Responsible Person is a business other than a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate the business owner and issue the business owner an administrative citation. If the Enforcement official can locate only the manager of the business, the administrative citation may be given to the manager of the business. If the address of the business is known, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be sailed to the business owner or Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mall. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. C. The Enforcement Official shall attempt to obtain on the administrative citation the signature of the Responsible Person, or in cases in which the Responsible Person is a corporation or business, the signature of the person served with the administrative citation. If the Responsible Person or person served refuses or fails to sign the administrative citation, the failure or refusal to sign shall not affect the validity of the citation or of subsequent proceedings. 960131 57130.00001 tpp 1330549 0 - 2 - Ct9 D. If the Enforcement Official is unable to locate the' Responsible Person for the violation, the administrative citation shall be mailed to the Responsible Parson by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. E. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, or by certified mail or regular mail, the Enforcement Official shall post the administrative citation on any real property within the City in which the City has knowledge that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest, and such posting shall be deemed effective service. F. It the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, by certified mail or regular mail, and the city is not aware that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest in any real property within the City, the Enforcement Official shall cause the administrative citation to be published in a newspaper likely to give actual notice to the Responsible Party. The publication shall be once a week for four successive weeks in a newspaper published at least once a week. G. The Enforcement official shall sign the administrative citation. 01.06.07 CONTENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS; Administrative citations shall contain all of the following information: A. The date and location of the violation and the approximate time the violation was observed. B. The City Code section violated and a description of how the section was violated. C. The action required to correct the violation. D. The consequences of failing to correct the violation. E. The amount of penalty imposed for the violation. F. The date, time, and place of the administrative hearing on the violation and the consequences for failing to attend the hearing. G. The signature of the Enforcement official, and the signature of the Responsible Person if that person can be located and will sign the citation, as set forth in Section 01.06.06. 960131 *7130-00001 tpp 13308(9 0 3 Treasurer. 01.06.08 PENALTIES ASSESSED: A. If a violation of the City Code or applicable state code section was defined as an infraction by the City Code before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation, the penalty assessed shall not exceed: 1. 5100 for the first violation. 2. $200 for the second violation of the same City Code or applicable state coda section within one year. 3. $500 for each additional violation of the same City Code or applicable state code section within one year. B. If a violation of the City Cods.or applicable state code Section was punishable as a misdemeanor before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation the penalty assessed shall not exceed $1,000. C. The penalty assessed for violations of ordinances that are adopted after this Article is adopted, and that are subject to this Article, shall not exceed $1,000. D. All penalties assessed shall be payable to the City E. Payment of a penalty shall not excuse the failure to correct the violation nor shall it bar further enforcement action by the City. 01.06.09 TIME FOR ADXINIBTRATrVE HEARING: The City shall conduct an administrative hearing at the date, time, and place indicated on the administrative citation. The hearing shall occur no earlier than fifteen (15) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person and no later than ninety (90) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.10 APPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE BEARING OPPXCER: The appropriate -Department Director shall appoint an Administrative Hearing Officer. The Department Director may appoint as the Administrative' Rearing Officer any member of that Department's staff, but shall neither appoint any Enforcement official nor any subordinate of any Enforcement Official. 01.06.11 REQUEST FOR. CONTINUANCE OF HEARINGS The Responsible Person may request one continuance of the hearing, but in no event may the hearing begin later than ninety (90) days after service of the administrative citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.12 PROCEDURES AT ADMINISTRATIVE BEARING: Administrative hearings are informal, and formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. Each party shall have the opportunity to present evidence in support of his or her case and 960131 87130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 4 to cross-examine witnesses. The City bears the burden of proof at an administrative hearing to establish a violation of the City Code. The Administrative Hearing Officer must use preponderance of evidence as the standard of evidence in deciding the issues. 01.06.13 FAILURE TO ATTEND ADMINISTRATIVE NEARING: If the Responsible Person fails to attend the scheduled hearing, the hearing will proceed without the Responsible Person, and he or she will be deemed to have waived his or her right to an administrative hearing. Notwithstanding this waiver and the time limits set forth in Section 01.06.09, if service of the administrative citation is made by posting the citation on real property within the City in which the Responsible Person has a Legal Interest, and the Responsible Person provides verifiable and substantial evidence that removal of the citation from the property by a third party caused the Responsible Person's failure to attend the scheduled hearing, the Responsible Person shall be entitled to an administrative hearing. 01.06.14 DBCIBION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SEARING OFFICERS The administrative hearing officer shall issue a written decision entitled "Administrative Order" no later than fifteen (15) days after the date on which the administrative hearing concludes. The Administrative Order shall be served upon the Responsible Person by any one of the methods set forth in Section 01.06.06 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall become final on the date of service, and shall notify the Responsible Person of his right to appeal as provided in Section 01.06.15 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall. also set a deadline for compliance with its terms in the event that the Responsible Person fails to file an appeal. If the violation is a continuing violation of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. 01.06.15 APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: Within 20 days after service of the Administrative Order upon the Responsible Person, he or she may seek review of the Administrative Order by filing a notice of appeal with the municipal court. The Responsible Person shall serve upon the City Clerk either in person or by first class mail a copy of the notice of appeal. If the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal, the Administrative Order shall be deemed confirmed. 01.06.16 FAILURE TO COMPLY PITH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Failure to comply with a final Administrative Order is a misdemeanor. If the municipal court rules in favor of the City or if the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal in the municipal court, and the Responsible Person then 960131 97130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 5 - 1 fails to comply with the Administrative Order, the City may file a criminal misdemeanor action against the Responsible Person. Filing a criminal misdemeanor action does not preclude the City from using any other legal remedy available to gain compliance with the Administrative Order. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of March, 1996. Attest: CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK Approved AsTo Form: , STEVEN L. DORSEY,(jCITY ATTORNEY I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 096-1088 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting thereof, held on_:the 13th day of March, 1996, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS CROWLEY, DRYDEN, FIWTZE, VICE MAYOR COTTON, AND MAYOR LESAGE. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. c:\wp51\ord\civilpen.feb \ord0961.088 960131 0130-00001 tpp 133081.9 0 • 6 CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK include, for the purposes of this Section only, any building under actual construction et such date; provided. that such building is completed within one year from such date. (1954 Code 523.27) 23.06.11: REPAIR. RELOCATION OR ALTERATION OF DAMAGED BUILDINGS: No building which has been damaged or partially destroyed to the extent of more then 50 percent of its replacement value shall be repaired. moved or altered except in conformity with the provisions of this Chapter pertaining to buildings thereafter erected. This Section shall not apply to existing legal non -conforming residential or accessory buildings damaged by fire or earthquake, which may be rebuilt on prior foundations end/or footprints to the preexisting size, configuration and style. (1954 Code 523.28) 23.06.12: MINIMUM LOT AREA AND WIDTH REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT PREVENT USE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING: The requirements of this Chapter es to minimum lot area and lot width shell not be construed to prevent the construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling on any lot if such lot. prior to July 8. 1994, or the effective date of any amendment thereto making such lot non -conforming, was: A. Shown separately upon an official subdivision map; or B. Shown by a separate number or letter on a record of survey map filed with the County Recorder of Los Angeles County; or C. Deeded by a deed of record; or D. Subject to a contact of sale. Such construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling shall comply with all the applicable development standards of this Chapter in effect at the time of the construction or expansion. (Ord. 094-1056. 6-8-94) 23.06.13: CONSISTENCY WITH HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN: Zone change, conditional use permit, variance and other land use decisions shall be consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan (approved November 30. 1989) relating to Citing and Citing Criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Nothing herein shell limit the ability of the City to attach appropriate conditions to the issuance of any such approval in order to protect the public health. safety or welfare nor to establish more stringent planning requirements or citing criteria than those specified in the County Pten. (Ord. 980, 7-11-90) 23.06.14: PROHIBITION AGAINST INCLUDING PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CERTAIN EASEMENTS FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING SETBACKS, LOT COVERAGE AND SIMILAR REQUIREMENTS: No portion of a parcel burdened by an easement. other than an easement for utility purposes, which effectively precludes use of City e1San Marino • 25.01.04 25.01.05 ----� 25.01.04: PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS: Any person who violates or causes or permits any person to violate Section 25.01.01 of this Article shall be required. at the time of obtaining the permits required by this Chapter, to pay a penalty equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the total amount of all permit fees assessed for the construction work or activity pursuant to this Chapter In addition to the amount of the permit fees. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.05: PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBLE: The property owner or occupant of any property at which a violation of this Chapter shall occur shall be responsible for and liable for charges provided for in Section 25.01.04 of this Artloie. (Ord. 092-1015. 6-10-92) City of San Marino 25.01.01 25.01.02 ARTICLE 01 GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION: 25.01.01: 25.01.02: 25.01.03: 25.01.04: 25.01.05: Permits Required Times Construction Prohibited Work by Owner Permitted Penalty for Violations Property Owner Responsible -� 25.01.01: PERMITS REQUIRED: ftshall be unlawful for any person to begin or perform any construction work or construction activity or to cause or permit any construction work or construction activity, for which a permit is required by this Chapter. to begin or perform on any residential or commercial parcel of property without having first obtained said penult. (Ord. 092-1015. 6-10.92) 25.01.02: TIMES CONSTRUCTION PROHIBITED: It shall be unlawful for any person to perform or to cause or permit to be performed any construction work or construction activity for which a permit is required by thls Chapter or for any person, requiring a business license pursuant to Chapter XI of this City Code to perform or to cause or permit to be performed any constriction work or construction activity on the following days: (Ord. 092-1015. 6-10-92) A. On Mondays through Fridays. before seven o'clock (7:00) after six o'clock (6:00) P.M.; except. that the Director of Planning and Building may authorize. in. connection with seismic upgrading or fire sprinkler installation, construction work or activity in the C-1 Zone to be performed outside between six o'clock (6:00) P.M. and nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. and inside an enclosed building after nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. Such construction work or activity shall be performed in compliance with any conditions the Director of Planning and Building shall impose to alleviate potential disturbance to surrounding properties. City of San Marino s•• • 4-4 Cry o/leo!l,.q JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 7.A. Mtg. Date: 3/8/99 DATE: MARCH 8, 1999 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. BACKGROUND This report is an update of similar reports related to prolonged building projects brought before the City Council on October 27, 1997, February 9, 1998, and August 24, 1998. Staff was directed to follow the implementation of a City of San Marino ordinance and review the progress of the Rolling Hills Community Association in this regard. Councilmembers requested that staff study the issue of prolonged building following the receipt of the attached letter and the appearance of Mr. and Mrs. John Heater at the meeting regarding the Juge property at 61 Eastfield Drive that has been under construction since January 1988 (more than 11 years). The Heaters referred to the attached newspaper article about the City of San Marino's Ordinance No. 096- 1088 pertaining to deadlines for construction projects. UPDATE To date, the City of San Marino has not enforced the fee penalty provisions of their Ordinance.' Planning Director David Saldana reports that he has extended building permits after valid reasons for the delay were provided in writing. The Rolling Hills Community Association considered and adopted a resolution requiring a Building Permit Agreement between the owner and the Community PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Papet. Association. At this time, an agreement form is being formulated by Community Association Attorney, Mr. Sid Croft. No implementation has actually occurred. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that staff report to the City Council on this subject in six months. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 2 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CI, 0/ Rolling JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 3-E Mtg. Date: 08/24/98 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER REPORT REGARDING UPDATE ON CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE RELATING TO PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. DATE: AUGUST 24, 1998 BACKGROUND In September of 1997, the City of San Marino passed Ordinance No. 097-1107 which requires that building projects be completed within a certain amount of time, according to their valuation. For example, a property owner would have six months to complete a $50,000 project, nine months for a $100,000 project, a year to finish a $250,000 project, etc.. The cost of running over schedule would be double the cost of the initial building permit. This report is before you this evening because Rolling Hills City Council received and filed a similar report on February 9, 1998, and directed staff to provide a follow up report on the implementation of this Ordinance in six months. UPDATE To date, the City of San Marino has not enforced the fee penalty provisions of this Ordinance because there have not been any violations. The Rolling Hills Community Association was also considering a method to manage the duration of building projects when this subject was presented to the City Council in September, 1997. It is reported that the Association's Legal Counsel is preparing a "Building Permit Contract" that will be considered by the Association Board in the future. -1- Panted on Recycled Paper. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report and staff will provide another status report in six months. CRN:bls SMupdate.doc C'iiy <allin qilrc INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E-mait cityofth@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 7-B Mtg. Date: 02/09/98 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 1998 BACKGROUND On October 27, 1997, the City Council received a staff report regarding prolonged building projects and a City of San Marino Ordinance that established fines for projects which are not completed within a specified time period. This report was prepared following presentation of information to the City Council by Mr. and Mrs. John Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive. At that meeting, staff was directed to observe the implementation of the San Marino Ordinance and provide a status report. This report is designed to provide the City Council with a status on the City of San Marino's activities. A copy of the staff report that was presented to the City Council on October 27, 1997 is attached for your information. CITY OF SAN MARINO PHILOSOPHY OF THE ORDINANCE Staff spoke to San Marino City Attorney Steve Dorsey to gather information on this Ordinance. The Ordinance adopted by the City of San Marino does not amend the Building Code. According to Mr. Dorsey, State Law requires that amendments to local Building Codes must be based on local climactic, geological or topographic conditions. It seem unlikely that there are such local conditions that would support unique building construction time limits in Rolling Hills. Further, revoking a building permit due to lengthy construction would seem counter productive to securing the timely completion of the project. -1- ®Printed on Recycled Paper. The Ordinance adopted by San Marino established language in the Municipal Code that sets forth penalties for failure to complete construction projects within specified time limits, without invalidating the building permit. The philosophy of this Ordinance is that fines for lengthy construction would be more effective than revoking the building permit and that the economic disincentive of the fines will cause construction to continue at an appropriate pace. Under the San Marino Ordinance, if a project is not completed under the specified time frame established pursuant to the valuation of the project, a 30 -day notice indicating that the City will be assessing an administrative penalty against the owner will be provided to that property owner. This provides another 30 day time period for the project to be completed without penalty. To date, the City of San Marino has not implemented this Ordinance against any projects because there have not been any violations. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the City Council consider this report and receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. Staff will provide an update to the City Council when the City of San Marino has experience administrating this Ordinance. CRN:mlk prvhmgedsm Cii, `l2lE.�..y JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310)377-729B E -malt tftyof,b aol.com Agenda Item No.: 9.B., Mtg. Date: 10/27/97 DATE: OCTOBER 27, 1997 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. BACKGROUND At the September 22, 1997 City Council meeting, Councilmembers requested that staff study the issue of prolonged building projects. This action followed the receipt of the attached letter and the appearance of Mr. and Mrs. John Heater at the meeting regarding the Juge property at 61 Eastfield Drive that has been under construction since January 1988 (almost 10 years). The Heaters referred to the attached newspaper article about the City of San Marino's Ordinance pertaining to deadlines for construction projects. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS The majority of new residential construction projects in the City of Rolling Hills are rarely completed within a two year window due to the large estate -size residences proposed that usually take.. longer than two years to complete. During the construction period, projects are sometimes prone to scheduling difficulties as a result of weather conditions or financing. ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION The Rolling Hills Community Association has been considering the attached draft resolution for some time that is entitled, A RESOLUTION TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 1 Cr: Printed on Recycled Paper. CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON UQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID UQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN The draft resolution addresses future adverse aesthetic and safety impacts of major construction projects that exceed $250,000. The resolution as proposed requires that the property owner and Association agree on a Substantial Completion Date and that the property owner provide a completion bond so that the Association can make claim for the completion bond or liquidated damages. The Community Association will review the proposed resolution again on October 23, 1997 and staff will update the City Council of any Community Association action taken at their meeting. CITY OF SAN MARINO San Marino's Ordinance has been reviewed and will be addressed by City Attorney, Michael Jenkins. We inquired and received the attached information from Ms. Carol A. Robb, City of San Marino City Clerk. The City of San Marino adopted Ordinance No. 097-1107 on September 10, 1997 requiring that construction projects be completed within certain time limits in accordance with valuations and subject to penalty fees if a project is not completed within those time limits. The time limits range from a 6 month completion time for valuations up to $50,000 and a 15 month time limit for valuations over $250,000. Penalties imposed range from $100 up to $1,000 per infraction (i.e., misdemeanor infraction). There is no Community Association in the City of San Marino. NEARBY CITIES The City of Rolling Hills Estates requires that projects commence within 6 months of approval. They do not have any prolonged projects but, the city could declare a prolonged project substandard and require it to be demolished or completed. This usually represents a lengthy process that may lead to litigation. Planning officials in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are in the process of formulating an amendment to the municipal code to enforce deadlines on projects. We will monitor this and provide updates as necessary. The City of Palos Verdes Estates applies a certain amount of working days to a particular project which may be extended by staff for six months for one time only. Further extensions may be established by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 2 in h Ions a Wet p _ Irlio . SEP I 1997 CITY OF RC:L:... ' it.U.S SY 12 September, 1997 City Council, City of Rolling Hills: Board of Directors, Rolling Hills Community Association Dear Friends: Please note an article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12th. 1997 regarding the action some local cities are taking about prolonged building projects. The Juge property next door to us. at 61 Eastfield Drive has been going on for ten long years. This has presented us with a very ugly, unpleasant and aggravating situation. It certainty does not seem to be in keeping with the high standards of life in this lovely community. We sincerely hope that the Board of Directors will see fit to enactsome sort of ordinance concerning a time limit for construction projects in this City. Perhaps you will want to communicate with the City Council of San Marino to find out how they are:proceeding on this issue. Sincerely, p_eite... St eistflell Inn relit, Nis to 31114 lame (3111311-1541 office rn111 S44 -111I • ROLLING HILLS REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Offered by John and Doreen Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive From our point of view, it's not the same Roiling Hills we moved to in 1956! The condition that has affected our view for over ten years is the excessively prolonged house -building ordeal next door to us to the south We have lived with the noise, the dust, the general disruption all this while. It has not been pleasant. This debaucle has certainly affected our property value. And others up and down Eastfield Drive. Here is a brief list of the problems we have experienced: Violation of easement rights: Initial placement of a hurricane fence crossed over the easement entrance Plan included a planting in the middle of the easement entrance Now driveway down the easement has been elevated to the extent that an access pathway to our rear lower level is impossible to use,-- too steep. Wall bunt into our easement and property, necessitating our having a survey to prove the encroachment. Tractor work on Sundays Auto parking in the easement (his driveway) The first. and foremost problem - approval of such incompatible plans given the sixe of the building pad Now, we believe there are solutions for our problems, and all others hlce them in the City. We refer you to the clipped article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12 regarding actions enacted by San Marino to correct just exactly these sorts of neighborhood control problems. Why cannot Rolling Hills control the building projects whithin the city? Each time we have complained about the excessive construction time we are advised the matter is out of the city's hands - the County governs. This certainly seems to be a "cop-out", sacrificing our authority to govern what occurs in our city to an outside bureaucracy. Is there a conclusion to this problem? Yes! Pass time limit laws on construction projects It is in the hands of our local elected officials. Sincerely, B4 FRIDAY. SIFTE113131 IL IMP • NEWS IN BRIEF — A summary of developments across Los Angeles County Law Imposes Time Limit on Construction Projects The City Council, tired of con- struction projects that leave neigh- bors enduring noise. dust un- sightly lots for years, nenacted a law that levies fines for failure to complete work within a designated time. The city is among the first in the. San Gabriel Valley toimpose a timetable for builders. Under law. approved by the council late Wednesday. a property owner would have six months to complete a $50.000 project. nine months for $100;000 fns and a year to finish. a $250.000 project. The fine for running over schedule would be double the cost of the initialbuild- ing permit, officials said. City Manager Debbie Bell said mount t a handful g complaints dthe city handful of projec led officials to make the change. One house remodeling project has dragged on for three years. longer than any other residential project thein Residents say a number of sites in the city seem to be permanent homes for work crews. concrete mixers and dozens of trucks. Many cities require only that builders show work is continuing o t nuery to get a new building permit six months. Pasadena officials are consider- ing a similar law. Residents of the South San Rafael Avenue area ve Pasadena have protested make -over of a mansion that has lasted nearly seven years. But Pasadena building officials said an- other project in the San Rafael Hills has lasted two decades as one man has single-handedly remod- eled a home. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. Purpose: To avoid the considerable future adverse aesthetic and safety impact on the Community Association and its members caused by the failure to complete construction of buildings within a reasonable time period. Definitions: For the purpose of this Resolution the phrase "Substantial Completion" shall mean that all exterior construction, roofing, painting, glazing, and other finishing called for on the building's approved plans have been completed so it appears from the outside as completed, together with installation of all approved hardscape and landscaping, irrigation systems, and removal of temporary fencing, power, and. sanitation. The "Substantial Completion Date" shall mean the date the project is Substantially Completed as defined herein. "Major Construction" shall be interpreted to mean any residential or ancillary new or remodel building project involving an estimated cost exceeding $250,000, which in the opinion of the Association, involves construction work visible by neighbors or from Association roadways or trails. Resolved Tbat: It shall be the policy of the Association as to all Major Construction to require as part of the permitting process that the Owner and the Association mutually agree to a reasonable Substantial Completion Date for the proposed improvements to reach the stage of Substantial Completion and to establish either the time and amount of a completion bond to be purchased by applicant in a form and amount satisfactory to Association, or the monthly amount which reasonably equals the liquidated damages to the Association and the members caused by a failure to Substantially Complete the improvements by the Substantial Completion Date. Failure to Substantially Complete by l j the Substantial Completion Date shall constitute a "Default" permitting Association to make claim against the completion bond or for the liquidated damages. The amount per month of liquidated damages shall be prorated on the basis of s 30 -day month for partial months and such amounts due the last day of each month and shall bear interest at 10% simple interest from the month -end of accrual until paid in full. Provided however. in the event of a Default, the Owner shall have an additional 4S- calendar day "Grace Period" within which to cause the improvements to be Substantially Completed and if the Owner achieves Substantial Completion within the Grace Period, the Association's rights and claims hereunder will be waived, but failure to achieve Substantial Completion within the Grace Period shall result in the Association's claims against the bonding company or for liquidated damages to be measured from the first date of Default. Upon written request and documentation supporting same filed by Owner, the Board in its sole discretion may grant one or more, but not to exceed 60 -day extensions, to the Substantial Completion Date due to unforeseen delays determined to be caused by Acts of God or other special unforeseeable circumstance, subject to such conditions as the Board may reasonably impose as a material part of such an extension. However, insufficient construction funds and/or failure of a contractor to perform its obligations shall generally not be considered a basis for extending the Substantial Completion Date. The Board may enforce its rights hereunder in the same manner as any other delinquent assessment against a Homeowner, including filing, and foreclosure upon, its lien for amounts due plus interest provided herein. L I 1 ur :am,' linr\LIIU ICL•VLO-JVu-VrU. :,c f0 LI .fir ♦J•JL IlU.vv.. r •vim s sr CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM AGENDA ITEM TO MAYOR MUT= AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM : / r'� ' AVID A. SALDARA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE SEPTEMBER 10, 1997 SUBJECT ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107.2nd Reading RE: MAXIMUM TIME LI Mi1TS FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS BACKGROUND: On August 13, 1997, Council approved on first reading, Ordinance No. 0974107. This pertains to the establishment of a Maximum time limit for the completion of const<ucdon projects. According to the ordinance a property owner will be subject to the payment of penalty fees by the City if work is not completed within a specific period of time. The deadlines vary in relationship to the project's valuation. For example, a small project under $50,000 in valuation would be required to be completed within six (6) months. A larger project having a valuation greater than $250,000 would be required to be completed within fifteen (15) months. Additionally, a provision would authorize the Planning and Building Director discretion to grant an extension to the required completion date if the project has been delaYed beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Violations would be enforced and penalties imposed in the same manner as violations of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. =COMMENDATION: Staffrecommends that the City Council approve and adopt on second reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 c.�r ea _ (,r•r 1` :.�1 ►! �!,!�i(_ -! ` Y or ;AN MARINE) •_ , I ur••,,.:hrr'rir►n•Ivu rcL. •uio .')'J Ur U� .•Lp. • .71 •J•vv flu .vv./ r TO FROM DATE SUBJECT CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR FILUTZB AND MEMBERS OP THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDARA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AGENDA AUGUST 13, 1997 ITEM ..._ ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107. lit Raiding CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COMPLETION DEADLINES 3 BACKGROUND: Last mouth, staff presented the City Council with a proposed ordinance that would place time limitations on commercial and residential construction projects. This proposal is a result of an increased number of resident complaints regarding the excessive period of time that some property owners take in completing a construction project. The main example is 770 Chaucer where this remodeling project has taken over 2 IA years and has not been completed. The residual noise. debris. traffic. and overall unattractiveness of building projects can only be tolerated within a reasonable time period by surrounding residents from a pmt.. The City Council was in agreement with the concept of this ordinance following further amendments by the City Attorney. The amended ordinance is attached for your consideration. BESIMINKIWAnONI Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 : w. •J11,1 , 1 1 11% 1 \V I L L • V L V V tJ V VI V. 64,7 ORDINANCE NO. O97 -I 107 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO AMENDING THE SAN MARINO CITY CODE REGARDING THE TIME WITHIN WHICH PROPERTY OWNERS MUST COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, Property owners sometimes take an ecceasively long period of time to complete a construction project and WHEREAS, delayed completion of construction for unreasonably long periods of time subjects neighboring property owners to unnecessary adverse impacts from construction noises and unsightliness caused by dead landscaping and storage of construction materials, equipment, trash, and portable toilets; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to encourage development projects that improve the appearance of properties and maintain high property values, but wants to prevent unreasonably lengthy construction projects that negatively affect surrounding properties; and WHEREAS, establishing a reasonable completion date for construction projects is necessary to protect neighborhoods from the adverse impacts of lengthy projects. in CTICY COUNCIL OF THE QTY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 of Article 01, Title XXV of the San Marino City Code are renumbered as Sections 25.01.06 and 25.01.07, respectively, and new Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 are added to Article 1 of Title XXV to read as follows: 25.01.04 COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. Unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 25.01.05, each person owning property for which a building permit has been issued pursuant to Article 2 of Title XXV of the San Marino City Code shall cause all work authorized by said permit to be completed within the time limits specified below from the date of issuance of the building permit; VALUATION PROJECT COMPLETION TIME Up to $50,000 $50,001 to $100,000 $100,001 to $250,000 $250,001 and over 6 months 9 months 12 months 15 months The valuation shall be the same valuation determined by the Building Official upon issuance of the building permit. L i l ur JY1I`I I IrirM1 11`IU I CL • O 10— JUU V 4&i `..CN le ri CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 PAGE TWO 25.01.05: EXTENSION OF COMPLETION DATES. TheDire torof Planning and Building may grant an extension of a completion date established pursuant to Section 25.01.04 if the Director finds that the project has been performed as expeditiously as reasonably possible and in a manner to reasonably accommodate the needs of persons residing in the neighborhood and that the delay in completion of construction was beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Decisions of the Director on whether to grant an extension may be appealed to the Planning Commission and ftom the Planning Commission to the City Council. Applications for an extension must be submitted no earlier than two months prior to the expiration date and no later than one month prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Section 01.06.01 of Article 6 of Chapter I, of the San Marino City Code is. amended to read as follows: 01.06.01: SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following sections of the San Marino City Code: a) 23.06.13; and b) 25.01.04. Section 3: The second paragraph of Section 01.06.13 of Chapter I of the San Marino City Code is amended to read as follows: If the violation is a continuing violation of Section 25.01.04 or of the building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code► the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of September, 1997. PAUL CROWLEY, VICE MAYO ATTEST: Oiha,L-Zaeb CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK _ 1 I ur .roll I Int. L19lJ L ►. • v, O- J v v- v v, OGIJ Li J• Lv I1U r V y CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO.097-1107 PAGE THREE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 097-1107 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marina at a Regular Meeting of the City Council held on the 10th day of September, by the following vote: AYES COUNCILMEMBERS BROWN,COTTON. DRYDEN, AND VICE MAYOR CROWLEY. NOES NONE. ABSTAIN MAYOR FILUTZE. ABSENT • NONE. CAROL A. ROBB. CMC/AAE CITY CLERK 1 1 ur . HIV I"IhIc 114U • ILL;oia-JUU-UiU/ .47t ep 1I 1�•L7 Iru.UV. TO FROM DATE SUBJECT ORDjjJANCR_NO. 097.1107. FIRST READING CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR COTTON AND MEMBERS OP THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDANA. DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT JULY 9. 1997 IMEISEEMLOKMELDENCLECIIMEES BACKGROUND; This item has been continued from the meetings of April 9th. June 11th. and June 21st. The proposed ordinance pertains to amending Chapter 25- Uniform Codes and Pine Prevention of the City Code. The amendment would do the following: • Establish a required project completion date based upon project valuation and date of building permit issuance. • Establish a penalty fee for projects exceeding the required project completion date This ordinance has been originated because of the increased number of complaints received from irate neighbors of construction projects. They heel that they are unreasonably inconvenienced by property owners who take an unusual amount of time to complete construction projects. An example of such a project is at 770 Chaucer Road. This project has taken 2 1 years and has not yet been com pleted. This project is an example where an owner has extended the project by calling for inspection right before the 180 -day expiration deadline on various phases of the project. A deterrent to lengthy projects. proposed by this ordinance, is a required project completion deadline. Staff proposes a deadline based upon building valuation. A small project should be completed sooner than a large project. Although a large project should be given more time than a small one, the City should require its completion not to exceed say fifteen months. Council should take the liberty to suggest more or less time based on what seems reasonable. As suggested by Councihnember Fdutze, kitchen remodels and other similar projects should not be subject to these restrictions. As such, staff has amended the ordinance by exempting all such interior projects. Finally. a penalty fee should be imposed if an owner exceeds the required project completion deadline. Proposed is to require fees to be paid in accordance with the civil enforcement procedures in Article 6 of Chapter 1 established last year with the tree preservation ordinance. This ordinance will not be effective unless the public is properly made aware of its existence. Staff intends to work closely with the San Marino Tribune to distribute information regarding this subject. Also. a 1 1 1 1 U r •.J r'I I V 1' I fl r\ 1 1'. V 1 LL • V 1 V ' J V V' V e V J C 1. I i J I L .J • L L/ 1 '11.1 . counter sign wiU be prepared and displayed. Staff is also working on a handout to accompany the issuance of all building permits that will not only cover this issue but also outline allowed construction hours. These would be in addition to the Guidelines for the Maintenance of Construction Sites. Addidonaily. staff will send notices warning owners before their permits expire. RECOMMENDATION; Staff recommends that the City Council approve on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 c:twp61% ouncinbldauc jul 2 eortlinmell. T� ,, Car.LCE u"al MALI 1_ 1 I -i Ur ;.)Hrl rIhir.111U 1LL.iLo—JUU—UrUy LL,yr 1N• rJ rsu.UUL r :. C O Y R S H E E T FAX To: City of Rolling Hills - ATTN: Lola Unger Fax #: (310) 377-7288 Subject: City of San Marino Ordinance No. 097-1107 - Penalties For Violations Date: September 22, 1997 Pages: 10, including this cover sheet. COMMENTS: Lola: Please find attached a copy of City of San Marino Ordinance No. 096-1088 which establishes the administrative procedures and penalties for violations of the City Code, and which the City references in Ordinance No. 097-1107 pertaining to the time within which property owners must complete construction. Section 2 of Ordinance No. 097-1107 concerning Section 01.06.01 of Article.6 of Chapter 1 of the San Marino City Code also refers to violations of sections 23.06.13 and 25.01.04. You will also find copies of these sections of the City Code attached for your information. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me. Cud' A- cticb From the desk of... CAROL A. ROBB. CMGAAE City Clerk City of San Marino 2200 Huntington Drive San Marino, CA 91100 (824) 300-0706 Fax (626) 3060700 L 1 I r Ut HIV I1HK 1 IVU 1 LL ; O 1 O-:JUU-U r u' JCS 44rir 14 JJ i,•u.vuc r 724 ORDINANCE WO. 096-1066 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BAN MARINO ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE CITY CODE OF SAN MARINO AND AMENDING THE BAN MARINO CITY CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Article 06 of Chapter I of the City Code of San Marino is added to read as follows: 01.06.01 SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following section of the San Marino City Code: 23.06.13. 01.06.02 DEFINITIONS: The following words and phrases, when used in the context of this Article, shall have the following meanings: A. ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of the San Marino City Code. B. LEGAL INTEREST: Any interest that is represented by a deed of trust, quitclaim deed, mortgage, judgment lien, tax or assessment lien, mechanic's lien or other similar instrument, which is recorded with the County Recorder. C. RESPONSIBLE PERSON: Any person who an Enforcement official determines is responsible for causing or maintaining a public nuisance or a violation of the City Code or applicable state codes. The term "Responsible Person" includes but is not limited to a property owner, tenant, person with a Legal Interest in real property or person in possession of real property. 01.06.03 AUTHORITY: Any person violating any section of this Code that .is subject to this Article may be issued an administrative citation by an Enforcement Official as provided in this Article. 01.06.04 PENALTIES: An administrative penalty shall be assessed by means of an administrative citation issued by the Enforcement Official, and shall be payable directly to the City Treasurer. Penalties shall be collected in accordance with the procedures specified in this Article. 01.06.05 CONTINUING VIOLATXONSI It shall constitute a new and separate offense for each and every day, or portion thereof, during which a violation of, or failure to comply with, any provision or requirement of this Code is committed, continued, or permitted by any person. The time period for computing the number of days a violation has continued for 960131 S7130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 Ur '0HN I'IHI' 11VU I tL ; +S 10 .)UU U i V 7 yep 44.111 ^^ 14.J4 I l,. . •J V_ r , „J purposes of this Section shall commence on and shall include the date of service of the Administrative Order, the date the Administrative Order otherwise provides, or for continuing violations of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning codes, 30 days following receipt of service of the Administrative Order, whichever date is applicable pursuant to Section 01.06.14. 01.06.06 PROCEDURES POR ISSUING ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS: Upon discovering a violation of any section of this Code that is subject to this Article, an Enforcement Official may issue an administrative citation, on a fora approved by the city Manager, to a Responsible Person, as follows: A. If the Responsible Person is a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate any one of the following individuals and issue to that individual an administrative citation: the president or other head of the corporation, a vice-president, a secretary or assistant secretary, a treasurer or assistant treasurer, a general manager, or a person authorized by the corporation to receive service of process in a civil action. If the office address of any of the above -listed individuals is known to the City, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to one of those individuals by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. 8. If the Responsible Person is a business other than a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate the business owner and issue the business owner an administrative citation. If the Enforcement Official can locate only the manager of the business, the administrative citation may be given to the manager of the business. If the address of the business is known, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to the business owner or Responsible Person by certified nail, postage prepaid, returnreceipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice nay be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. C. The Enforcement Official shall attempt to obtain on the administrative citation the signature of the Responsible Person, or in cases in which the Responsible Person is a corporation or business, the signature of the person served with the administrative citation. If the Responsible Person or person served refuses or fails to sign the administrative citation, the failure or refusal to sign shall not affect the validity of the citation or of subsequent proceedings. 960131 x7130-00001 tpp 1330649 0 — 2 - ur J-114 rsi—,iiiiU I CL • 010—.:0VV—Ul Ui . cp LLrJo 1Y•Jv Ivu.WJA. r ,+ D. If the Enforcement Official is unable to locate the Responsible Person for the violation, the administrative citation shall be mailed to the Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. E. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, or by certified mail or regular mail, the Enforcement Official shall post the administrative citation on any real property within the City in which the City has knowledge that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest, and such posting shall be deemed effective service. F. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, by certified mail or regular mail, and the City is not aware that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest in any real property within the City, the Enforcement Official shall cause .the administrative citation to be published in a newspaper likely to give actual notice to. the Responsible Party. The publication shall be once a week for four successive weeks in a newspaper published at least once a week. G. The Enforcement Official shall sign the administrative citation. 01.06.07 CONTE31T 07 ADMINISTRATIVE CZTATZONS i Administrative citations shall contain all of the following information: A. The date and location of the violation and the approximate time the violation was observed. B. The City Code section violated and a description of how the section was violated. C. The action required to correct the violation. D. The consequences of failing to correct the violation. E. The amount of penalty imposed for the violation. F. The date, time, and place of the administrative hearing on the violation and the consequences for failing to attend the hearing. G. The signature of the Enforcement official, and the signature of the Responsible Person if that person can be located and will sign the citation, as set forth in Section 01.06.06. 960131 17130-00001 cpp 1330849 0 - 3 1 1- 1 I 1 ur .aHN I'IrtI11'IU I GL OlG'aV'J-V � V: ,.t J 7.7 i 14 • JV 1'IU . V'.' 1 Treasurer. 01.06.06 PENALTIES ASSEBBEDe A. If a violation of the City Code or applicable state code section was defined as an infraction by the City Code before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation, the penalty assessed shall not exceed: 1. $100 for the first violation. 2. $200 for the second violation of the same City code or applicable state code section within one year. 3. $500 for each additional violation of the same City Code or applicable state code section within one year. B. If a violation of the City Code. or applicable state code section was punishable as a misdemeanor before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation the penalty assessed shall not exceed $1,000. C. The penalty assessed for violations of ordinances that are adopted after this Article is adopted, and that are subject to this Article, shall not exceed $1,000. D. All penalties assessed shall be payable to the City E. Payment of a penalty shall not excuse the failure to correct the violation nor shall it bar further enforcement action by the City. 01.06.09 TIME FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REARING: The City shall conduct an administrative hearing at the date, time, and place indicated on the administrative citation. The hearing shall occur no earlier than fifteen (15) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person and no later than ninety (90) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.10 APPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE BEARING OFFICER: The appropriate• Department Director shall appoint an Administrative Hearing Officer. The Department Director may appoint as the Administrative' Nearing Officer any member of that Department's staff, but shall neither appoint any Enforcement official nor any subordinate of any Enforcement Official. 01.06.11 REQUEST FOR:CONTINUANCE OF HEARING: The Responsible Person may request one continuance of the hearing, but in no event may the hearing begin later than ninety (90) days after service of the administrative citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.12 PROCEDURES AT ADMINISTRATIVE BEARING: Administrative hearings are informal, and formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. Each party shall have the opportunity to present evidence in support of his or her case and 96013117130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 4 - Ur aHN I'Irlf\lf4U f�L•olo-.7VV-Vf V7 to cross-examine witnesses. The City bears the burden of proof at an administrative hearing to establish a violation of the City Code. The Administrative Hearing Officer must use preponderance of evidence as the standard of evidence in deciding the issues. 01.06.13 FAILURE TO ATTEND ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING: If the Responsible Person fails to attend the scheduled hearing, the hearing will proceed without the Responsible Person, and he or she will be deemed to have waived his or her right to an administrative hearing. Notwithstanding this waiver and the time limits set forth in Section 01.06.09, if service of the administrative citation is made by posting the citation on real property within the City in which the Responsible Person has a Legal Interest, and the Responsible Person provides verifiable and substantial evidence that removal of the citation from the property by a third party caused the Responsible Person's failure to attend the scheduled hearing, the Responsible Person shall be entitled to an administrative hearing. 01.06.14 DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SEARING OFFICERs The administrative hearing officer shall issue a written decision entitled "Administrative Order" no later than fifteen (15) days after the date on which the administrative hearing concludes. The Administrative Order shall be served upon the Responsible Person by any one of the methods set forth in Section 01.06.06 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall become final on the date of service, and shall notify the Responsible Person of his right to appeal as provided in Section 01.06.15 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall, also set a deadline for compliance with its terms in the event that the Responsible Person fails to file an appeal. . If the violation is a continuing violation of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. 01.06.15 APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERt Within 20 days after service of the Administrative Order upon the Responsible Person, he or she may seek review of the Administrative Order by filing a notice of appeal with the municipal court. The Responsible Person shall serve upon the city Clerk either in person or by first class mail a copy of the notice of appeal. If the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal, the Administrative Order shall be deemed confirmed. 01.06.16 FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS Failure to comply with a final Administrative Order is a misdemeanor. If the municipal court rules in favor of the City or if the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal in the municipal court, and the Responsible Person then 960131 87130-00001 tpp 1330349 0 — 5 - Ur• , JH1V I LL • G10=JUU L) r Q J fails to comply with the Administrative Order, the City may file a criminal misdemeanor action against the Responsible Person. Filing a criminal misdemeanor action does not preclude the City from using any other legal remedy available to gain compliance with the Administrative Order. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of March, 1996. Attest: CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK Approved As To Form: STEVEN L. DORSEY, ITY ATTORNEY I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 096-1088 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting thereof, held on�.the.13th day of March, 1996, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCIUIEMBERS CROWLEY, DRYDEN, FILUTZE, VICE MAYOR COTTON, AND MAYOR LESAGE. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK c:\wp51\ord\civilpen.fob \ord0961.088 960131 97130.00001 tpp 1350849 0 • 6 I_ 1 1 1 Ur JHN I'IHR I NU ILL;o10-JUU-UiUJ JC1 [L r J av•U� ilU.UUt r .,,,-. include, for the purposes of this Section only, any building under actual construction at such date; provided, that such building is completed within one year from such date. (1964 Code 123.27) 23.06.11: REPAIR. RELOCATION OR ALTERATION OF DAMAGED BUILDINGS: No building which has been damaged or partially destroyed to the extgnt of more then 50 percent of its replacement value shalt be repaired. moved or altered except in conformity with the provisions of this Chapter pertaining to buildings thereafter erected. This Section shall not apply to existing legal non -conforming residential or accessory buildings damaged by fire or earthquake, which may be rebuilt on prior foundations end/or footprints to the preexisting size, configuration and style. (1964 Code 123.28) 23.06.12: MINIMUM LOT AREA AND WIDTH REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT PREVENT USE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING: The requirements of this Chapter as to minimum lot area and lot width shell not be construed to prevent the construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling on any lot if such lot. prior to July 8. 1994, or the effective date of any amendment thereto making such lot non -conforming. was: A. Shown separately upon an official subdivision map; or B. Shown by a separate number or letter on a record of survey map filed with the County Recorder of Los Angeles County; or C. Deeded by a deed of record; or D. Subject to a contract of sale. Such construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling shall comply with all the applicable development standards of this Chapter in effect at the time of the construction or expansion. (Ord. 094-1056. 6-8-94) 23.06.13: CONSISTENCY WITH HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN: Zone change, conditional use permit, variance and other land use decisions shall be consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan (approved November 30. 1989) relating to Citing and Citing Criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Nothing herein shall limit the ability of the City to attach appropriate conditions to the issuance of any such approval in order to protect the public health. safety or welfare nor to establish more stringent planning requirements or citing criteria than those specified In the County Plan. (Ord. 980, 7-11-90) 23.06.14: PROHIBITION AGAINST INCLUDING PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CERTAIN EASEMENTS FOR PURPOSES 01? DETERMINING SETBACKS. LOT COVERAGE AND SIMILAR REQUIREMENTS: No portion of a parcel burdened by an easement, other than an easement for utility purposes, which effectively precludes use of city e'en San Marino y i ur o Tl t � 25.01.04 I L L• V J. V V V V L I v_ r z-.i. 25.01.05 ---� 25.01.04: PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS: Any person who violates or causes or permits any person to violate Section 25.01.01 of this Article shall be required, at the time of obtaining the permits required by this Chapter, to pay a penalty equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the total amount of all permit fees assessed for the construction work or activity pursuant to this Chapter In addition to the amount of the perr fit fees. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.05: PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBLE: The property owner or occupant of any property at which a violation of this Chapter shall occur shall be responsible for and liable for charges provided for in Section 26.01.04 of this Article. (Ord. 092-1016, 6-10-92) City of San Marino a cf vo. v V v �•�. r LL • J1 1�•1!1 14u VV� 25.01.01 SECTION: 25.01.01: 25.01.02: 25.01.03: 25.01.04: 25.01.05: -----� 25.01.01: ARTICLE 01 GENERAL PROVISIONS Permits Required ' Times Construction Prohibited Work by Owner Permitted Penalty for Violations Property Owner Responsible 25.01.02 PERMITS REQUIRED: It shall be unlawful for any person to begin or perform any construction work or construction activity or to cause or permit any construction work or construction activity, for which a permit is required by this Chapter, to begin or perform on any residential or commercial parcel of property without having first obtained said permit. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.02: TIMES CONSTRUCTION PROHIBITED: It shall be unlawful for any person to perform or to cause or permt to be performed any construction work or construction activity for which a permit 1s required by this Chapter or for any person requiring a business license pursuant to Chapter XI of this City Code to perform or to cause or permit to be performed eny construction work or construction activity on the following days: (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) A. On Mondays through Fridays, before seven o'clock (7:00) A.M. and after six o'dock (8:00) P.M.; except. that the Director of Planning and Building may authorize, in. connection with seismic upgrading or fire sprinkler Installation, construction work or activity in the C-1 Zone to be performed outside between six o'clock (6:00) P.M. and nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. and inside an enclosed building after nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. Such construction work or activity shall be performed in compliance with any conditions the Director of Planning and Building shall impose to alleviate potential disturbance to surrounding properties. City of San Marino San Marino Ordinance No. 097-1107 Penalty Description Project Completion Time Valuation 6 Months 9 Months 12 Months 15 Months EXTENSION OF COMPLETION DATES Up to $50,000 $50,001 to $100,000 $100,001 to $250,000 $250,001 and over The Director of Planning and Building may grant an extension of a completion date established pursuant to Section 25.01.04 if the Director finds that the project has been performed as expeditiously as reasonably possible and in a manner to reasonably accommodate the needs of persons residing in the neighborhood and that the delay in completion of construction was beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Decisions of the Director on whether to grant an extension may be appealed to the Planning Commission and from the Planning Commission to the City Council. Applications for an extension must be submitted no earlier than two months prior to the expiration date and no later than one month prior to the expiration date. City 0/ RALF _MI6 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 FRANK E. HILL Mayor THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Mayor Pro Tem B. ALLEN LAY Councilmember JODY MURDOCK Councilmember GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Councilmember August 26, 1998 Mr.. and Mrs. John N. Heater 53 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90724 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Heater: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Members of the Rolling Hills City Council received and:filed the attached staff report at their City Council meeting held on August 24, 1998. ':No action was taken by the City Council. 1,. As indicated in the recommendation portion of the staff report, we will provide another status report regarding the experience of the City of San Marino ordinance and any progress made by the Rolling Hills Community Association regarding this subject in six months. You will be notified as to the time and date of that City Council meeting and provided a copy of that report. Thank you, for your cooperation. Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Craig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 08/25/98heater.ltr cc: City Council 0.4 Printed on Recycled Paper. INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 3-E Mtg. Date: 08/24/98 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: REPORT REGARDING UPDATE ON CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE RELATING TO PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. DATE: AUGUST 24,1998 BACKGROUND In September of 1997, the City of San Marino passed Ordinance No. 097-1107 which requires that building projects be completed within a certain amount of time, according to their valuation. For example, a property owner would have six months to complete a $50,000 project, nine months for a $100,000 project, a year to finish a $250,000 project, etc.. The cost of running over schedule would be double the cost of the initial building permit. This report is before you this evening because Rolling Hills City Council received and filed a similar report on February 9, 1998, and directed staff to provide a follow up report on the implementation of this Ordinance in six months. UPDATE To date, the City of San Marino has not enforced the fee penalty provisions of this Ordinance because there have not been any violations. The Rolling Hills Community Association was also considering a method to manage the duration of building projects when this subject was presented to the City Council in September, 1997. It is reported that the Association's Legal Counsel is preparing a "Building Permit Contract" that will be considered by the Association Board in the future. -1- ®Printed on Recycled Paper. I, I RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report and staff will provide another status report in six months. CRIV:bls SMupdate.doc TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Ca, `l2!!MS _Alf INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 7-B Mtg. Date: 02/09/98 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. FEBRUARY 9, 1998 BACKGROUND On October 27, 1997, the City Council received a staff report regarding prolonged building projects and a City of San Marino Ordinance that established fines for projects which are not completed within a specified time period. This report was prepared following presentation of information to the City Council by Mr. and Mrs. John Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive. At that meeting, staff was directed to observe the implementation of the San Marino Ordinance and provide a status report. This report is designed to provide the City Council with a status on the City of San Marino's activities. A copy of the staff report that was presented to the City Council on October 27, 1997 is attached for your information. CITY OF SAN MARINO PHILOSOPHY OF THE ORDINANCE Staff spoke to San Marino City Attorney Steve Dorsey to gather information on this Ordinance. The Ordinance adopted by the City of San Marino does not amend the Building Code. According to Mr. Dorsey, State Law requires that amendments to local Building Codes must be based on local climactic, geological or topographic conditions. It seem unlikely that there are such local conditions that would support unique building construction time limits in Rolling Hills. Further, revoking a building permit due to lengthy construction would seem counter productive to securing the timely completion of the project. -1- 3 Printed on Recycled Paper. The Ordinance adopted by San Marino established language in the Municipal Code that sets forth penalties for failure to complete construction projects within specified time limits, without invalidating the building permit. The philosophy of this Ordinance is that fines for lengthy construction would be more effective than revoking the building permit and that the economic disincentive of the fines will cause construction to continue at an appropriate pace. Under the San Marino Ordinance, if a project is not completed under the specified time frame established pursuant to the valuation of the project, a 30 -day notice indicating that the City will be assessing an administrative penalty against the owner will be provided to that property owner. This provides another 30 day time period for the project to be completed without penalty. To date, the City of San Marino has not implemented this Ordinance against any projects because there have not been any violations. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the City Council consider this report and receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. Staff will provide an update to the City Council when the City of San Marino has experience administrating this Ordinance. CRN:mlk prolonged.sta -2- SST et, `eo!! g JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO.2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E-maik cityofrh@aol.c.om Agenda Item No.: 9.B. Mtg. Date: 10/27/97 DATE: OCTOBER 27,1997 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. BACKGROUND At the September 22, 1997 City Council meeting, Councilmembers requested that staff study the issue of prolonged building projects. This action followed the receipt of the attached letter and the appearance of Mr. and Mrs. John Heater at the meeting regarding the Juge property at 61 Eastfield Drive that has been under construction since January 1988 (almost 10 years). The Heaters referred to the attached newspaper article about the City of San Marino's Ordinance pertaining to deadlines for construction projects. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS The majority of new residential construction projects in the City of Rolling Hills are rarely completed within a two year window due to the large estate -size residences proposed that usually take.. longer than two years to complete. During the construction period, projects are sometimes prone to scheduling difficulties as a result of weather conditions or financing. ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION The Rolling Hills Community Association has been considering the attached draft resolution for some time that is entitled, A RESOLUTION TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN The draft resolution addresses future adverse aesthetic and safety impacts of major construction projects that exceed $250,000. The resolution as proposed requires that the property owner and Association agree on a Substantial Completion Date and that the property owner provide a completion bond so that the Association can make claim for the completion bond or liquidated damages. The Community Association will review the proposed resolution again on October 23, 1997 and staff will update the City Council of any Community Association action taken at their meeting. CITY OF SAN MARINO San Marino's Ordinance has been reviewed and will be addressed by City Attorney, Michael Jenkins. We inquired and received the attached information from Ms. Carol A. Robb, City of San Marino City Clerk. The City of San Marino adopted Ordinance No. 097-1107 on September 10, 1997 requiring that construction projects be completed within certain time limits in accordance with valuations and subject to penalty fees if a project is not completed within those time limits. The time limits range from a 6 month completion time for valuations up to $50,000 and a 15 month time limit for valuations over $250,000. Penalties imposed range from $100 up to $1,000 per infraction (i.e., misdemeanor infraction). There is no Community Association in the City of San Marino. NEARBY CITIES The City of Rolling Hills Estates requires that projects commence within 6 months of approval. They do not have any prolonged projects but, the city could declare a prolonged project substandard and require it to be demolished or completed. This usually represents a lengthy process that may lead to litigation. Planning officials in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are in the process of formulating an amendment to the municipal code to enforce deadlines on projects. We will monitor this and provide updates as necessary. The City of Palos Verdes Estates applies a certain amount of working days to a particular project which may be extended by staff for six months for one time only. Further extensions may be established by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 2 joh Mu leelel SEP 2 1997 CITY OF AiL S By 12 September, 1997 City Council, City of Rolling Hills: Board of Directors, Rolling Hills Community Association • Dear Friends: Please note an article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12th. 1997 regarding the action some local cities are taking about prolonged building projects. The Juge property next door to us, at 61 Eastfield Drive has been going on for ten long years. This has presented us with a very ugly, unpleasant and aggravating situation. It certainly does not seem to be in keeping with the high standards of life in this lovely community. We sincerely hope that the Board of Directors will see fit to enact some sort of ordinance concerning a time limit for construction projects in this City. Perhaps you will want to communicate with the City Council of San Marino to find out how they are proceeding on this issue. Sincerely, �w to. Gov S3 eestliell Irire an fills to 11274 lame (31I) 317.2141 efnte (311) S44-1111 ROLLING HILLS REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Offered by John and Doreen Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive From our point of view, it's not the same Rolling Hills we moved to in 1956! The condition that has affected our view for over ten years is the excessively prolonged house -building ordeal next door to us to the south. We have lived with the noise, the dust, the general disruption all this while. It has not been pleasant. This debaucle has certainly affected our property value. And others up and down Eastfield Drive. Here is a brief list of the problems we have experienced: Violation of easement rights: Initial placement of a hurricane fence crossed over the easement entrance Plan included a planting in the middle of the easement entrance Now driveway down the easement has been elevated to the extent that an access pathway to our rear lower level is impossible to use,— too steep. Wall built into our easement and property, necessitating our having a survey to prove the encroachment. Tractor work on Sundays Auto parking in the easement (his driveway) The first. and foremost problem - approval of such incompatible plans given the sixe of the building pad. Now, we believe there are solutions for our problems, and all others bite them in the City. We refer you to the clipped article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12 regarding actions enacted by San Marino to correct just exactly these sorts of neighborhood control problems. Why cannot Rolling Hills control the building projects whithin the city? Each time we have complained about the excessive construction time we are advised the matter is out of the city's hands - the County governs. This certainly seems to be a "cop-out", sacrificing our authority to govern what occurs in our city to an outside bureaucracy. Is there a conclusion to this problem? Yes! Pass time limit laws on construction projects It is in the hands of our local elected officials. Sincerely, 0 ti $4 FlUDAY. SEPTEMBER ' IL Iw1 • t EWS IN BRIEF A summary of developments across Los Angeles County Sas Nubs Law Imposes Time Limit on Construction Projects The sty es, tired of con- struction projects that leave neigh- bors enduring noise, dust and un- sightly lots for years, has enacted a law that levies fines for failure to complete work within a designated The city is among the first in the San Gabriel Valley to impose a law. aple by theers. Under the council late law. approved Wednesday. a property owner would have six months to complete a $50,000 project. nine months for 8100.000 project and a year to finish. a 8260.000 project. The fine for running over schedule would be double the cost of the initial build- ing permit, officials said. City Manager Debbie Bell said mounting complaints about a handful of projects around the city led officials to make the change. One house remodeling project has dragged on for three years. longer than any other residential project in the city. Residents say a number of sites in the city seem to be permanent homes for work crews. concrete mixers and dozens of trucks. that Many cities require only show work is continuing to get a new building permit every six months. Pasadena officials are consider- ing a similar law. Residents of the South San Rafael Avenue area in Pasadena have protested a massive make -over ofnearly seen years. t has lasted nearly Pasadena building officials said San idan- other project fael Hills has lasted two decades as one man has single-handedly remod- eled a home. 13, r.fs‘ iI TITLE OF RESOLUTION: TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. Purpose: To avoid the considerable future adverse aesthetic and safety impact on the Community Association and its members caused by the failure to complete construction of buildings within a reasonable time period. Definitions: For the purpose of this Resolution the phrase "Substantial Completion" shall mean that all exterior construction, roofing, painting, glazing, and other finishing called for on the building's approved plans have been completed so it appears from the outside as completed, together with installation of all approved hardscape and landscaping, irrigation systems, and removal of temporary fencing, power, and sanitation. The "Substantial Completion Date" shall mean the date the project is Substantially Completed as defined herein. "Major Construction" shall be interpreted to mean any residential or ancillary new or remodel building project involving an estimated cost exceeding $250,000, which in the opinion of the Association, involves construction work visible by neighbors or from Association roadways or trails. Resolved That: It shall be the policy of the Association as to all Major Construction to require as part of the permitting process that the Owner and the Association mutually agree to a reasonable Substantial Completion Date for the proposed improvements to reach the stage of Substantial Completion and to establish either the time and amount of a completion bond to be purchased by applicant in a form and amount satisfactory to Association, or the monthly amount which reasonably equals the liquidated damages to the Association and the members caused by a failure to Substantially Complete the improvements by the Substantial Completion Date. Failure to Substantially Complete by t i the Substantial Completion Date shall constitute a "Default" permitting Association to make claim against the completion bond or for the liquidated damages. The amount per month of liquidated damages shall be prorated on the basis of a 30 -day month for partial months and such amounts due the last day of each month and shall bear interest at 10% simple interest from the month -end of accrual until paid in full. Provided however, in the event of a Default, the Owner shall have an additional 45- calendar day "Grace Period" within which to cause the improvements to be Substantially Completed and if the Owner achieves Substantial Completion within the Grace Period, the Association's rights and claims hereunder will be waived, but failure to achieve Substantial Completion within the Grace Period shall result in the Association's claims against the bonding company or for liquidated damages to be measured from the first date of Default. Upon written request and documentation supporting same filed by Owner, the Board in its sole discretion may grant one or more, but not to exceed 60 -day extensions, to the Substantial Completion Date due to unforeseen delays determined to be caused by Acts of God or other special unforeseeable circumstance, subject to such conditions as the Board may reasonably impose as a material part of such an extension. However, insufficient construction funds and/or failure of a contractor to perform its obligations shall generally not be considered a basis for extending the Substantial Completion Date. The Board may enforce its rights hereunder in the same manner as any other delinquent assessment against a Homeowner, including filing, and foreclosure upon, its lien for amounts due plus interest provided herein. 1 I I Uf LI4U I LL_•V10-JVU-VI V9 JCr . I PV( 1J J1 ICU V'Jv r •.Jc TO FROM DATE SUBJECT Ft CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM AGENDA ITEM MAYOR FILUT ZE AND MEMBERS OF MB CITY COUNCIL AVID A. SALDARA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT SEPTEMBER 10, 1997 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107- 2nd Reading RE: MAXIMUM 'TIME LIMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS BACKGROUND On August 13, 1997, Council approved on first reading, Ordinance No. 097-1107. This pertains to the establishment of a maximum time limit for the completion of construction projects. According to the ordinance a property owner will be subject to the payment of penalty fees by the City if work is not completed within a specific period of time. The deadlines vary in relationship to the project's valuation. For example, a small project under $50,000 in valuation would be required to be completed within six (6) months. A larger project having a valuation greater than $250,000 would be required to be completed within fifteen (15) months. Additionally, a provision would authorize the Planning and Building Director discretion to grant an extension to the required completion date if the project has been delayed beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Violations would be enforced and penalties imposed in the same manner as violations of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. B1 COMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on second reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 c..wp61owmclmawimo.sep i .,; ` :(.._:\' l,►•• y ;INA_ -! _ Y or ;AN ► Arilfai _ 1 1 1 ur' I'Ir'11\ 1.11U I C L• 010- .+ V V- V I V J ‚ ii • .J • J V l i u • V V J • CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM TO MAYOR FILUTZB AND MEMBERS OP THE CITY COUNCIL FROM DAVID A. SALDARA. DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AGENDA 3 DATE : ' AUGUST 13. 1997 SUBJECT ORDINANCE NO. 0974107. 1st Remain CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COMPLETION DEADLINES BACKGROUND: Last month, staff presented the City Council with a proposed ordinance that would place time limitations on commercial and residential construction projects. This proposal is a result of an increased number of resident complaints regarding the excessive period of time that some property owners take in completing a construction project The main example is 770 Chaucer where this remodeling project has taken over 2 1 years and has not been completed. The residual noise, debris, traffic, and overall unattractiveness of building projects can only be tolerated within a reasonable time period by surrounding residents from a project. • The City Council was in agreement with the concept of this ordinance following further amendments by the City Attorney. The amended ordinance is attached for your consideration. RECOIVIMENDATIONt Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 1_,11 ,I,11 1 11 14% 1 II V L1_ • V L V JV V V 1 v_ Vcr rt- l1 1J1 ♦J •..- 1.1u .VV. f ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO AMENDING THE SAN MARINO CITY CODE REGARDING THE TIME WITHIN WHICH PROPERTY OWNERS MUST COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, Property owners sometimes take an excessively long period of time to complete a construction project; and WHEREAS, delayed completion of construction for unreasonably long periods of time subjects neighboring property owners to unnecessary adverse impacts from construction noises and unsightliness caused by dead landscaping and storage of construction materials, equipment, trash, and portable toilets; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to encourage development projects that improve the appearance of properties and maintain high property values, but wants to prevent unreasonably lengthy construction projects that negatively affect surrounding properties; and WHEREAS, establishing a reasonable completion date for construction projects is necessary to protect neighborhoods from the adverse impacts of lengthy projects. THE CI'T'Y COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 of Article 01, Title XXV of the San Marino City Code are renumbered as Sections 25.01.06 and 25.01.07, respectively, and new Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 are added to Article 1 of Title XXV to read as follows: 25.01.04 COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. Unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 25.01.05, each person owning property for which a building permit has been issued pursuant to Article 2 of Title XXV of the San Marino City Code shall cause all work authorized by said permit to be completed within the time limits specified below from the date of issuance of the building permit; VALUATION PROJECT COMPLETION TIME Up 10 550,000 550,001 to 5100,000 5100,001 to 5250,000 5250,001 and over 6 months 9 months 12 months 15 months The valuation shall be the same valuation determined by the Building Official upon issuance of the building permit. i l l Ur JriIV I'Ir1M1 11,1U I GL•O10—JUU—Vi VJ '-'CN 11 e V, 1 J• L .J pit) V • VV. r _� CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 PAGE TWO _ 25.01.05: EXTENSION OF COMPLETION DATES. TheDirectorof Planning and Building may grant an extension of a completion date established pursuant to Section 25.01.04 if the Director finds that the project has been performed as expeditiously as reasonably possible and in a manner to reasonably accommodate the needs of persons residing in the neighborhood and that the delay in completion of construction was beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Decisions of the Director on whether to grant an extension may be appealed to the Planning Commission and from the Planning Commission to the City Council. Applications for an extension must be submitted no earlier than two months prior to the expiration date and no later than one month prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Section 01.06.01 of Article 6 of Chapter I, of the San Marino City Code is. amended to read as follows: 01.06.01: SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following sections of the San Marino City Code: a) 23.06.13; and b) 25.01.04. Section 3: The second paragraph of Section 01.06.13 of Chapter I of the San Marino City Code is amended to read as follows: If the violation is a continuing violation of Section 25.01.04 or of the building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of September, 1997. 1427 PAUL CROWLEY, VICE MAYO ATTEST: CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 PAGE THREE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 097-1107 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting of the City Council held on the 10th day of September, by the following vote: AYES. - : COUNCILMEMBERS BROWN,COTTON. DRYDEN, . AND VICE MAYOR CROWLEY. NOES NONE. ABSTAIN MAYOR FILUTZE. ABSENT NONE. C' a CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK s wp6I\od dar7I.)m L 1 Ur •CHI' rtHR 1IlU ItL.OiC,-aUU-UlUy .:,ep 1J • .D I'NU . VIJc r CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM TO •• MAYOR COTTON AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM / DAVID A. SALDANA. DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE : JULY 9. 1997 SUBJECT ORDIWINCE NO. 097-1107. FIRST READING LIFF_SPAN OF B m DING 1'ERMMRlT.Q BACKGROUND; This item has been continued from the meetings of April 9th. June 11th. and June 21st. The proposed ordinance pertains to amending Chapter 25- Uniform Codes and Fire Prevention of the City Code. The amendment would do the following: • Establish a required project completion date based upon project valuation and date of building permit issuance. • Establish a penalty fee for projects exceeding the required project completion date This ordinance has been originated because of the increased number of complaints received from irate neighbors of construction projects. They feel that they are unreasonably inconvenienced by property owners who take an unusual amount of time to complete construction projects. An example of such a project is at 770 Chaucer Road. This project has taken 2 '2 years and has not yet been completed. This project is an example where an owner has extended the project by calling for inspection right before the 180 -day expiration deadline on various phases of the project. A deterrent to lengthy projects. proposed by this ordinance. is a required project completion deadline. Staff proposes a deadline based upon building valuation. A small project should be completed sooner than a large project. Although a large project should be given more time than a small one. the City should require its completion not to exceed say fifteen months. Council should take the liberty to suggest more or less time based on what seems reasonable. As suggested by Councihnember Filutze, kitchen remodels and other similar projects should not be subject to these restrictions. As such. staff has amended the ordinance by exempting all such interior projects. Finally. a penalty fee should be imposed if an owner exceeds the required project completion deadline. Proposed is to require fees to be paid in accordance with the civil enforcement procedures in Article 6 of Chapter 1 established last year with the tree preservation ordinance. This ordinance will not be effective unless the public is properly made aware of its existence. Staff intends to work closely with the San Marino Tribune to distribute information regarding this subject. Also. a 1 jr Jnlr I 'In1'LIru L_• V iY JC f+ L I , J I zt ♦ J • I_ V I'1 _. V V L I _ counter sign will be prepared and displayed. Staff is also working on a handout to accompany the issuance of all building permits that will not only cover this issue but also outline allowed construction hours. These would be in addition to the Guidelines for the Maintenance of Construction Sites. Additionally. staff will send notices warning owners before their permits expire. RECOMMENDATION; Staff recommends that the City Council approve on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 c:1wp61 ‘counetAbtdgcc. jul 2 0.-o 09 To ijJ.g e.14"1 CEw .4. NA:.1 Woirst l� 1g4't '_ 1 I i Ur ::,1-04 I"INK I F'4U ILL;blo-JUU-UrU7 JCp LL,7i 1VU.UU. C O V E R S H E E T FAX To: City of Rolling Hills - ATTN: Lola Unger Fax #: (310) 377-7288 Subject: City of San Marino Ordinance No. 097-1107 - Penalties For Violations Date: September 22, 1997 Pages: 10, including this cover sheet. COMMENTS: Lola: Please find attached a copy of City of San Marino Ordinance No. 096-1088 which establishes the administrative procedures and penalties for violations of the City Code, and which the City references in Ordinance No. 097-1107 pertaining to the time within which property owners must complete construction. Section 2 of Ordinance No. 097-1107 concerning Section 01.06.01 of Artide 6 of Chapter 1 of the San Marino City Code also refers to violations of sections 23.06.13 and 25.01.04. You will also find copies of these sections of the City Code attached for your information. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me. From the desk of... CAROL A. ROBB. CMC/AAE City Clerk City of San Marino 2200 Huntington Drive San Marino, CA 91106 (626) 300-0705 Fax: (626) 3000709 1_ 1 1 1 Ur JHN I1HK 1 NU I CL O10':�VU'Ji Vy :,• C� L t r 7 i l '-r • J J i r u . V V L r AS ORDINANCE NO. 096 -loss AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF SAN MARINO AND AMENDING THE CODE SAN MARINO PROCEDURES AND THE CITY CODE OF SAN MARINO CITY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES FOLLOWS: ORDAIN SECTION 1. Article 06 of Chapter I of the City Code of San Marino is added to read as follows: 01.06.01 SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following section of the San Marino City Code: 23.06.13. 01.06.02 DEFINITIONS: The following words and phrases, when used in the context of this Article, shall have the following meanings: A. ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of the San Marino City Code. B. LEGAL INTEREST: Any interest that is represented by a deed of trust, quitclaim deed, mortgage, judgment lien, tax or assessment lien, mechanic's lien or other similar instrument, which is recorded with the County Recorder. C. RESPONSIBLE PERSON: Any person who an Enforcement Official determines is responsible for causing or maintaining a public nuisance or a violation of the City Code or applicable state codes. The term "Responsible Person" includes but is not limited to a property owner, tenant, person with a Legal Interest in real property or person in possession of real property. 01.06.03 AUTHORITY: Any person violating any section of this Code that .is subject to this Article may be issued an administrative citation by an Enforcement Official as provided in this Article. 01.06.04 PENALTIES: An administrative penalty shall be assessed by means of an administrative citation issued by the Enforcement Official, and shall be payable directly to the City Treasurer. Penalties shall be collected in accordance with the procedures specified in this Article. 01.06.05 CONTINUING VIOLATIONS: It shall constitute a new and separate offense for each and every day, or portion thereof, during which a violation of, or failure to comply with, any provision or requirement of this Code is committed, continued, or permitted by any person. The time period for computing the number of days a violation has continued for 960131 S7130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 . 1 1_ 1 1 'i Ur 31 -IN I•IHk1IVU ILL;o10--)UU-UrUJ JCf1 4h: r 14 • J4 Ivv .'J='< < purposes of this Section shall commence on and shall include the date of service of the Administrative Order, the date the Administrative Order otherwise provides, or for continuing violations of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning codes, 30 days following receipt of service of the Administrative Order, whichever date is applicable pursuant to Section 01.06.14. 01.06.06 PROCEDURES FOR ISSUING ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS: Upon discovering a violation of any section of this Code that is subject to this Article, an Enforcement Official may issue an administrative citation, on a form approved by the City Manager, to a Responsible Person, as follows: A. If the Responsible Person is a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate any one of the following individuals and issue to that individual an administrative citation: the president or other head of the corporation, a vice-president, a secretary or assistant secretary, a treasurer or assistant treasurer, a general manager, or a person authorized by the corporation to receive service of process in a civil action. If the office address of any of the above -listed individuals is known to the City, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to one of those individuals by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. B. If the Responsible Person is a business other than a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate the business owner and issue the business owner an administrative citation. If the Enforcement Official can locate only the manager of the business, the administrative citation may be given to the manager of the business. If the address of the business is known, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to the business owner or Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. C. The Enforcement Official shall attempt to obtain on the administrative citation the signature of the Responsible Person, or in cases in which the Responsible Person is a corporation or business, the signature of the person served with the administrative citation. If the Responsible Person or person served refuses or fails to sign the administrative citation, the failure or refusal to sign shall not affect the validity of the citation or of subsequent proceedings. 960131 $7130.00001 tpp 1330849 0 — 2 - ._1 1 ur .r HIV III11CLIVU ICL G1G-JV'i-VfUi JCH LL r 7 14 •.�v Ivu V'J� r v D. If the Enforcement Official is unable to locate the Responsible Person for the violation, the administrative citation shall be mailed to the Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. E. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, or by certified mail or regular mail, the Enforcement Official shall post the administrative citation on any real property within the City in which the City has knowledge that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest, and such posting shall be deemed effective service. F. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, by certified mail or regular mail, and the City is not aware that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest in any real property within the City, the Enforcement Official shall cause the administrative citation to be published in a newspaper likely to give actual notice to the Responsible Party. The publication shall be once a week for four successive weeks in a newspaper published at least once a week. G. The Enforcement Official shall sign the administrative citation. 01.06.07 CONTENT OF AD![INIBTRATIVV CITATIONS: Administrative citations shall contain all of the following information: A. The date and location of the violation and the approximate time the violation was observed. B. The City Code section violated and a description of how the section was violated. C. The action required to correct the violation. D. The consequences of failing to correct the violation. E. The amount of penalty imposed for the violation. F. The date, time, and place of the administrative hearing on the violation and the consequences for failing to attend the hearing. G. The signature of the Enforcement Official, and the signature of the Responsible Person if that person can be located and will sign the citation, as set forth in Section 01.06.06. 960131 s7130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 3 MOP LL I I ur . HIN x1111\ 1IVu I G L• O L C' J U'J - V I V! Treasurer. 01.06.08 PENALTIES ASSESSED: A. If a violation of the City Code or applicable state code section was defined as an infraction by the City Code before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation, the penalty assessed shall not exceed: 1. $100 for the first violation. 2. $200 for the second violation of the same City Code or applicable state code section within one year. 3. $500 for each additional violation of the same City Code or applicable state code section within one year. B. If a violation of the City Code. or applicable state code section was punishable as a misdemeanor before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation the penalty assessed shall not exceed $1,000. C. The penalty assessed for violations of ordinances that are adopted after this Article is adopted, and that are subject to this Article, shall not exceed $1,000. D. All penalties assessed shall be payable to the City E. Payment of a penalty shall not excuse the failure to correct the violation nor shall it bar further enforcement action by the City. 01.06.09 TIME FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SEARING: The City shall conduct an administrative hearing at the date, time, and place indicated on the administrative citation. The hearing shall occur no earlier than fifteen (15) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person and no later than ninety (90) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.10 APPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SEARING OFFICER: The appropriate Department Director shall appoint an Administrative Hearing Officer. The Department Director may appoint as the Administrative Hearing Officer any member of that Department's staff, but shall neither appoint any Enforcement Official nor any subordinate of any Enforcement Official. 01.06.11 REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF HEARING: The • Responsible Person may request one continuance of the hearing, but in no event may the hearing begin later than ninety (90) days after service of the administrative citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.12 PROCEDURES AT ADMINISTRATIVE SEARING: Administrative hearings are informal, and formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. Each party shall have the opportunity to present evidence in support of his or her case and 960131 17130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 4 I_ 1 I 1 ur ..HI`4 I'IriM 1IVU ILL • O l O-:JUU-U I U 9 .iC tL r 7 i IVV . VVA. r r. to cross-examine witnesses. The City bears the burden of proof at an administrative hearing to establish a violation of the City Code. The Administrative Hearing Officer must use preponderance of evidence as the standard of evidence in deciding the issues. 01.06.13 FAILURE TO ATTEND ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING: If the Responsible Person fails to attend the scheduled hearing, the hearing will proceed without the Responsible Person, and he or she will be deemed to have waived his or her right to an administrative hearing. Notwithstanding this waiver and the time limits set forth in Section 01.06.09, if service of the administrative citation is made by posting the citation on real property within the City in which the Responsible Person has a Legal Interest, and the Responsible Person provides verifiable and substantial evidence that removal of the citation from the property by a third party caused the Responsible Person's failure to attend the scheduled hearing, the Responsible Person shall be entitled to an administrative hearing. 01.06.14 DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICERS The administrative hearing officer shall issue a written decision entitled "Administrative Order" no later than fifteen (15) days after the date on which the administrative hearing concludes. The Administrative Order shall be served upon the Responsible Person by any one of the methods set forth in Section 01.06.06 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall become final on the date of service, and shall notify the Responsible Person of his right to appeal as provided in Section 01.06.15 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall also set a deadline for compliance with its terms in the event that the Responsible Person fails to file an appeal. If the violation is a continuing violation of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. 01.06.15 APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: Within 20 days after service of the Administrative Order upon the Responsible Person, he or she may seek review of the Administrative Order by filing a notice of appeal with the municipal court. The Responsible Person shall serve upon the City Clerk either in person or by first class mail a copy of the notice of appeal. If the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal, the Administrative Order shall be deemed confirmed. 01.06.16 FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: Failure to comply with a final Administrative Order is a misdemeanor. If the municipal court rules in favor of the City or if the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal in the municipal court, and the Responsible Person then 960131 07130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 5 OOP IJ r •, HIV I"I r1 r .L l "v U ILL•G10—.iVV—Vi VJ rte•. JCf+ �t r Jl i'4 _J IVU •'J 'J._ I vi fails to comply with the Administrative Order, the City may file a criminal misdemeanor action against the Responsible Person. Filing a criminal misdemeanor action does not preclude the City from using any other legal remedy available to gain compliance with the Administrative Order. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of March, 1996. Attest: CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK Approved As To Form: STEVEN L. DORSEY,(ftITY ATTORNEY I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing. Ordinance No. 096-1088 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting thereof, held on the 13th day of March, 1996, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS CROWLEY, DRYDEN, FILUTZE, VICE MAYOR COTTON, AND MAYOR LESAGE. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. c:\wp51\ord\civilpen.feb \ordO961.088 960131 S7130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 • 6 Qambu.kavb CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK 1 1 i ur JHf1 I"IHi.1NU ILi_ •o 0-JUV-V•Ui 7,1 JCS LGrif 14•:.r; IVU r •V•_ include, for the purposes of this Section only, any building under actual construction et such date; provided, that such building is completed within one year from such date. (1964 Code 123.27) 23.06.11: REPAIR. RELOCATION OR ALTERATION OF DAMAGED BUILDINGS: No building which has been damaged or partially destroyed to the extent of more than 50 percent of its replacement value shall be repaired. moved or altered except in conformity with the provisions of this Chapter pertaining to buildings thereafter erected. This Section shall not apply to existing legal non -conforming residential or accessory buildings damaged by fire or earthquake, which may be rebuilt on prior foundations and/or footprints to the preexisting size, configuration and style. (1954 Code 623.28) 23.06.12: MINIMUM LOT AREA AND WIDTH REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT PREVENT USE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING: The requirements of this Chapter es to minimum lot area and lot width shall not be construed to prevent the construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling on any lot if such lot, prior to July 8. 1994, or the effective date of any amendment thereto making such lot non -conforming, was: A. B. C. D. Shown separately upon an official subdivision map; or Shown by a separate number or letter on a record of survey County Recorder of Los Angeles County; or Deeded by a deed of record; or Subject to a contract of sale. map filed with the Such construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling shall comply with all the applicable development standards of this Chapter in effect at the time of the construction or expansion. (Ord. 094-1056, 6-8-94) -'� 23.06.13: CONSISTENCY WITH HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN: Zone change, conditional use permit. variance and other land use decisions shall be consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan (approved November 30. 1989) relating to Citing and Citing Criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Nothing herein shall limit the ability of the City to attach appropriate conditions to the issuance of any such approval in order to protect the public health, safety or welfare nor to establish more stringent planning requirements or citing criteria than those specified in the County Plan. (Ord. 980, 7-11-90) 23.06.14: PROHIBITION AGAINST INCLUDING PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CERTAIN EASEMENTS FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING SETBACKS. LOT COVERAGE AND SIMILAR REQUIREMENTS: No portion of a parcel burdened by an easement, other than an easement for utility purposes, which effeotively precludes use of City of San Marino •_ 1 1 I 'Jr R.1IlU ILL • 010-.J!JU- V i U i 1 J• .-)1 1.4U • . -"-1 L • _ _ 25.01.04 25.01.05 25.01.04: PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS: Any person who violates or causes or permits any person to violate Section 25.01.01 of this Article shall be required, at the time of obtaining the permits required by this Chapter, to pay a penalty equal to one hundred percent (100%) Of the total amount of all permit fees assessed for the construction work or activity pursuant to this Chapter in addition to the amount of the permit fees. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.05: PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBLE: The property owner or occupant of any property at which a violation of this Chapter shall occur shall be responsible for and liable for charges provided for in Section 25.01.04 of this Article. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) City of San Marino • 1 I I •J r l 1 1 1 t rl l\ L I •I V L L • 3S' .•Cl-t 1:_,•V1 I' U . r 25.01.01 SECTION: 25.01.01: 25.01.02: 25.01.03: 25.01.04: 25.01.05: ---� 25.01.01: ARTICLE 01 GENERAL PROVISIONS Permits Required Times Construction Prohibited Work by Owner Permitted Penalty for Violations Property Owner Responsible 25.01.02 PERMITS REQUIRED: It shall be unlawful for any person to begin or perform any construction work or construction activity or to cause or permit any construction work or construction activity, for which a permit is required by this Chapter, to begin or perform on any residential or commercial parcel of property without having first obtained said permit. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.02: TIMES CONSTRUCTION PROHIBITED: It shall be unlawful for any person to perform or to cause or permit to be performed any construction work or construction activity for which a permit is required by this Chapter or for any person requiring a business license pursuant to Chapter XI of this City Code to perform or to cause or permit to be performed any construction work or construction activity on the following days: (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) A. On Mondays through Fridays, before seven o'clock (7:00) A.M. and after six o'clock (6:00) P.M.; except, that the Director of Planning and Building may authorize, in. connection with seismic upgrading or fire sprinkler installation, construction work or activity in the C-1 Zone to be performed outside between six o'clock (6:00) P.M. and nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. and inside an enclosed building after nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. Such construction work or activity shall be performed in compliance with any conditions the Director of Planning and Building shall impose to alleviate potential disturbance to surrounding properties. City of San Marino Cu, `l2l! y Jd,PG INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 B. ALLEN LAY Mayor FRANK E. HILL Mayor Pro Tem THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Councilmember JODY MURDOCK Councilmember GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Councilmember February 10, 1998 Mr. and Mrs. John Heater 59 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Heater: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Attached for your information is a copy of the staff report that was discussed by the City Council at their meeting on Monday, February 9, 1998. As a result of that discussion, staff was directed to present another status report in six months on the efforts of the Rolling Hills Community Association and the efforts of the City of San Marino on this subject. As you will notice in the staff report, the City of San Marino has yet to apply this Ordinance to a building project. We will let you know the date when this status report will be presented to the City Council. If you would like to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Craig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 02/10/98heater.ltr. cc: City Council City Attorney Lola Ungar, Planning Director si Printed on Recycled Paper. Cuy 0/ l2 fl.•,.y .1hPL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377.7288 E-mail cityofrh@aoLcom Agenda Item No.: 7-B Mtg. Date: 02/09/98 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 1998 BACKGROUND On October 27, 1997, the City Council received a staff report regarding prolonged building projects and a City of San Marino Ordinance that established fines for projects which are not completed within a specified time period. This report was prepared following presentation of information to the City Council by Mr. and Mrs. John Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive. At that meeting, staff was directed to observe the implementation of the San Marino Ordinance and provide a status report. This report is designed to provide the City Council with a status on the City of San Marino's activities. A copy of the staff report that was presented to the City Council on October 27, 1997 is attached for your information. CITY OF SAN MARINO PHILOSOPHY OF THE ORDINANCE Staff spoke to San Marino City Attorney Steve Dorsey to gather information on this Ordinance. The Ordinance adopted by the City of San Marino does not amend the Building Code. According to Mr. Dorsey, State Law requires that amendments to local Building Codes must be based on local climactic, geological or topographic conditions. It seem unlikely that there are such local conditions that would support unique building construction time limits in Rolling Hills. Further, revoking a building permit due to lengthy construction would seem counter productive to securing the timely completion of the project. -1- Printed do Recycled Paper. y The Ordinance adopted by.San Marino established language in the Municipal Code that sets forth penalties for failure to complete construction projects within specified time limits, without invalidating the building permit. The philosophy of this Ordinance is that fines for lengthy construction would be more effective than revoking the building permit and that the economic disincentive of the fines will cause construction to continue at an appropriate pace. Under the San Marino Ordinance, if a project is not completed under the specified time frame established pursuant to the valuation of the project, a 30 -day notice indicating that the City will be assessing an administrative penalty against the owner will be provided to that property owner. This provides another 30 day time period for the project to be completed without penalty. To date, the City of San Marino has not implemented this Ordinance against any projects because there have not been any violations. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the City Council consider this report and receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. Staff will provide an update to the City Council when the City of San Marino has experience administrating this Ordinance. CRN:mlk prolonged.sta eily ofielliny INCORPORATED JANUARY 3$, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE SEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1621 FAX 1310) 377•7280 &mitt dlyolrheaolcom Agenda Item No.: EL Mtg. Date: 10/27/97 DATE: OCTOBER 27, 1997 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. BACKGROUND At the September 22, 1997 City Council meeting, Councilmembers requested that staff study the issue of prolonged building projects. This action followed the receipt of the attached letter and the appearance of Mr. and Mrs. John Heater at the meeting regarding the Juge property at 61 Eastfield Drive that has been under construction since January 1988 (almost 10 years). The Heaters referred to the attached newspaper article about the City of San Marino's Ordinance pertaining to deadlines for construction projects. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS The majority of new residential construction projects in the City of Rolling Hills are rarely completed within a two year window due to the large estate -size residences proposed that usually take longer than two years to complete. During the construction period, projects are sometimes prone to scheduling difficulties as a result of weather conditions or financing. ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION The Rolling Hills Community Association has been considering the attached draft resolution for some CO tNime that is PLETION" OF �tBUILDINGSRESOLUTION INVOLVING "MAJOR "SUBSTANTIAL PROLONGED CONSiRUCIION PROJECTS PAGE 1 ®P.nteO on Recycled Pace, CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. The draft resolution addresses future adverse aesthetic and safety impacts of major construction projects that exceed $250,000. The resolution as proposed requires that the property owner and Association agree on a Substantial Completion Date and that the property owner provide a completion bond so that the Association can make claim for the completion bond or liquidated damages. The Community Association will review the proposed resolution again on October 23, 1997 and staff will update the City Council of any Community Association action taken at their meeting. CITY OF SAN MARINO San Marino's Ordinance has been reviewed and will be addressed by City Attorney, Michael Jenkins. We inquired and received the attached information from Ms. Carol A. Robb, City of San Marino City Clerk. The City of San Marino adopted Ordinance No. 097-1107 on September 10, 1997 requiring that construction projects be completed within certain time limits in accordance with valuations and subject to penalty fees if a project is not completed within those time limits. The time limits range from a 6 month completion time for valuations up to $50,000 and a 15 month time limit for valuations over $250,000. Penalties imposed range from $100 up to $1,000 per infraction (i.e., misdemeanor infraction). There is no Community Association in the City of San Marino. NEARBY CU LES The City of Rolling Hills Estates requires that projects commence within 6 months of approval. They do not have any prolonged projects but, the city could declare a prolonged project substandard and require it to be demolished or completed. This usually represents a lengthy process that may lead to litigation. Planning officials in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are in the process of formulating an amendment to the municipal code to enforce deadlines on projects. We will monitor this and provide updates as necessary. The City of Palos Verdes Estates applies a certain amount of working days to a particular project which may be extended by staff for six months for one time only. Further extensions may be established by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 2 ins Illi t! letter E'% -r 111..)) APA'a SEP ! 1997 CITY OF RC=L- . ;; AiL S 12 September, 1997 City Council, City of Rolling Hills: Board of Directors, Rolling Hills Community Association Dear Friends: Please note an article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12th. 1997 regarding the action some local cities are taking about prolonged building projects. The Juge property next door to us. at 61 F.astfield Drive has been going on for ten long years. This has presented us with a very ugly, unpleasant and aggravating situation. It certainly dots not seem to be in keeping with the high standards of life in this lovely community. We sincerely hope that.the Board of Directors will see fit to enact some sort of ordinance concerning a time limit for construction projects in this City. Perhaps you will want to communicate with the City Council of San Marino to find out how they are proceeding on this issue. Sincerely, z-N914s.(9k,-: SS tisltlell 1(Itt fitful 1T1s a t1274 list (1111111.241 Otte (1111$44 1111 • ROLLING HILLS REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Offered by John and Doreen Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive From our point of view, it's not the same Rolling Hills we moved to in 1956! The condition that has affected our view for over ten years is the excessively prolonged house -building ordeal next door to us to the south. We haw lived with the noise, the dust, the general disruption all this while. It has not been pleasant. This debaucle has certainly affected our property value. And others up and down Eastfield Drive. Here is a brief list of the problems we have experienced: Violation of easement rights: Initial placement of a hurricane fence crossed over the easement entrance Plan included a planting in the middle of the easement entrance Now driveway down the easement has been elevated to the extent that an access pathway to our rear lower level is impossible to use,-- too steep. Wall built into our easement and property, necessitating our having a survey to prove the encroachment. Tractor work on Sundays Auto parking in the easement (his driveway) The first. and foremost problem - approval of such incornpatrbk plans given the sixe of the building pad. Now, we believe there are solutions for our problems, and all others like them in the City. We refer you to the clipped article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12 regarding actions enacted by San Marino to correct just exactly these sorts of neighborhood control problems. Why cannot Rolling Hills control the building projects whithin the city? Each time we have complained about the excessive construction time we are advised the matter is out of the city's hands - the County governs. This certainly seems to be a "cop-out", sacrificing our authority to govrrn what occurs in our city to an outside bureaucracy. Is there a conclusion to this problem? Yes! Pass time limit laws on construction projects It is in the hands of our local elected officials. Sincerely, c) • 94 ter% a ton NEWS IN BRIEF • • A summary of developments across Los kirks County Law Imposes Time Limit on Construction Projects The Oty Council. tired of con- struction projects that leave neigh - bore enduring noise, dust and un- sightly lots for years, has enacted a law that levies fines for failure to complete work within a designated Lim The city is among the first in the San Gabriel Valley to impose a timetable for builders. Under late the law, approved by the council Wednesday, a property owner would e six months a nine months for a $50,000 project, 8100.000 project and a year to finish. a $250,000 project. The fine for running over schedule would be double the cost of the initial build- ing peril, officials said City Manager Debbie Bell said mounting complaints about a handful of projects around the city e. n officials t��gU► project has Oneahouse longer dragged on for three years, than any other residential project in the city. Residents say a number of sites in the city seem to be permanent homes for work crews, concrete mixers and dozens of trucks. that Many cities require builders show work is continuing nuing to get a new building permit every six months. Pasadena officials are consider- ing a similar law. Residents of the South San Rafael Avenue area in Pasadena have protested a massive make -over of amansion ye that ha But lasted nearly seven Pasadena building officials an- other projec In Hills has lasted two decades as one man has single-handedly remod- eled a home. • • goc TITLE OF RESOLUTION: TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. Purpose: To avoid the considerable future adverse aesthetic and safety impact on the Community Association and its members caused by the failure to complete construction of buildings within a reasonable time period. Definitions: For the purpose of this Resolution the phrase "Substantial Completion" shall mean that all exterior construction, roofing, painting, glazing, and other finishing called for on the building's approved plans have been completed so it appears from the outside as completed, together with installation of all approved hardscape and landscaping, irrigation systems, and removal of temporary fencing, power, and sanitation. The "Substantial Completion Date" shall mean the date the project is Substantially Completed as defined herein. "Major Construction" shall be interpreted to mean any residential or ancillary new or remodel building project involving an estimated cost exceeding $250,000, which in the opinion of the Association, involves construction work visible by neighbors or from Association roadways or trails. Resolved That: It shall be the policy of the Association as to all Major Construction to require as part of the permitting process that the Owner and the Association mutually agree to a reasonable Substantial Completion Date for the proposed improvements to reach the stage of Substantial Completion and to establish either the time and amount of a completion bond to be purchased by applicant in a form and amount satisfactory to Association, or the monthly amount which reasonably equals the liquidated damages to the Association and the members caused by a failure to Substantially Complete the improvements by the Substantial Completion Date. Failure to Substantially Complete by t the Substantial Completion Date shall constitute a "Default" permitting Association to make claim against the completion bond or for the liquidated damages. The amount per month of liquidated damages shall be prorated on the basis of a 30 -day month for partial months and such amounts due the last day of each month and shall bear interest at 10% simple interest from the month -end of accrual until paid in full. Provided however, in the event of a Default, the Owner shall have an additional 45. calendar day "Grace Period" within which to cause the improvements to be Substantially Completed and if the Owner achieves Substantial Completion within the Grace Period, the Association's rights and claims hereunder will be waived, but failure to achieve Substantial Completion within the Grace Period shall result in the Association's claims against the bonding company or for liquidated damages to be measured from the first date of Default. Upon written request and documentation supporting same filed by Owner, the Board in its sole discretion may grant one or more, but not to exceed 60 -day extensions, to the Substantial Completion Date due to unforeseen delays determined to be caused by Acts of God or other special unforeseeable circumstance, subject to such conditions as the Board may reasonably impose as a material part of such an extension. However, insufficient construction funds and/or failure of a contractor to perform its obligations shall generally not be considered a basis for extending the Substantial Completion Date. The Board may enforce its rights hereunder in the same manner as any other delinquent assessment against a Homeowner, including filing, and foreclosure upon, its lien for amounts due plus interest provided herein. TO FROM DATE SUBJECT • AGENDA ITEM, ice CITY OP SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR FILUTT.13 AND MFMIERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AVID A. SALDARA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT SEPTEMBER 10, 1997 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107. 2nd Readlpg RE: MAXIMUM TIME LaMTTS FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS BACKGROUNDI On August 13, 1997, Council approved on first reading. Ordinance No. 097-1107. This pertains to the establishment of a maximum time limit for the completion of construction projects. According to the ordinance a property owner will be subject to the payment of penalty fees by the City if work is not completed within a specific period of time. The deadlines vary in relationship to the project's valuation. For example, a small project under $50,000 in valuation would be required to be completed within six (6) months. A larger project having a valuation greater than $250,000 would be required to be completed within fifteen (15) months. Additionally, a provision would authorize the Planning and Building Director discretion to grant an extension to the required completion date if the project has been delayed beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Violations would be enforced and penalties imposed in the same manner as violations of the Tree Preservation Ordinance RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on second reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment Ordinance No. 097.1107 eAv p6tloosmc0RmAu time.sey ': : `i 1. i (,1•1 y ,��� :!,SCI(_ or f ::).'j MARIN() CRS TO FROM DATE SUBJECT CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR FILUTZB AND MEMBERS OP THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDAIIA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AUGUST 13, 1997 AGENDA`p/l 3 .V• .....--....a��,......� ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107, 1st Reading CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COMPLETION DEADLINES BACKGROUND; Last month, staff presented the City Council with a proposed ordinance that would place time limitations on commercial and residential construction projects. This proposal is a result of an increased number of resident complaints regarding the excessive period of time that some property owners take in completing a construction project. The main example is 770 Chaucer where this remodeling project has taken over 2 IA years and has not been completed. The residual noise, debris, traffic, and overall unattractiveness of building projects can only be tolerated within a reasonable time period by surrounding residents from a project. The City Council was in agreement with the concept of this ordinance following further amendments by the City Attorney. The amended ordinance is attached for your consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO AMENDING THE SAN MARINO CITY CODE REGARDING THE TIME WITHIN WHICH PROPERTY OWNERS MUST COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, Property owners sometimes take an excessively long period of time to complete a construction project; and WHEREAS, delayed completion of construction for unreasonably long periods of time subjects neighboring property owners to unnecessary adverse impacts from construction noises and unsightfness caused by dead landscaping and storage of construction materials, equipment, trash, and portable toilets; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to encourage development projects that improve the appearance of properties and maintain high property values, but wants to prevent unreasonably lengthy construction projects that negatively affect surrounding properties; and establishing a reasonable completion date for construction projects is necessary to protect neighborhoods from the adverse impacts of lengthy projects. THE CITY COUNCLL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 of Article 01, Title XXV of the San Marino City Code are renumbered as Sections 25.01.06 and 25.01.07, respectively, and new Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 are added to Article 1 of Title XXV to read as follows: 25.01.04 COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. Unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 25.01.05, each person owning property for which a building permit has been issued pursuant to Article 2 of Title XXV of the San Marino City Code shall cause all work authorized by said permit to be completed within the time limits specified below ftom the date of issuance of the building permit; VALUATION PROJECT COMPLETION TIME Up to 350,000 350,001 to 3100,000 S100,001 to S250,000 5250,001 and over 6 months 9 months 12 months 15 months The valuation shall be the same valuation determined by the Building Official upon issuance of the building permit. CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 PAGB TWO 25.01.05: EXTENSION OF COMPLETION DATES. TZ7eDirectorof Planning and Building may grant an extension of a completion date established pursuant to Section 25.01.04 if the Director finds that the project has been performed as expeditiously as reasonably possible and in a manner to reasonably accommodate the needs of persons residing in the neighborhood and that the delay in completion of construction was beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Decisions of the Director on whether to grant an extension may be appealed to the Planning Commission and from the Planning Commission to the City Council. Applications fbr an extension must be submitted no earlier than two months prior to the expiration date and no later than one month prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Section 01.06.01 of Article 6 of Chapter I, of the San Marino City Code is amended to read as follows: 01.06.01: SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following sections of the San Marino City Code: a) 23.06.13; and b) 25.01.04. Section 3: The second paragraph of Section 01.06.13 of Chapter I of the San Marino City Code is amended to read as follows: If the violation is a continuing violation of Section 25.01.04 or of the building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of September, 1997. PAUL CROWLEY, VICE MAYO ATTEST: Cam, k-4.* CAROL k ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO.097-1107 PAGE THREE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 097-1107 was duly adopted by the City Couna7 of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting of the City Council held on the l 0th day of September, by the following vote: AYES COUNCILMEMBERS BROWN, COTTON, DRYDEN, AND VICE MAYOR CROWLEY. NOES ABSTAIN ABSENT • • • NONE. MAYOR FILUTZE. NONE. asekb CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK TO FROM DATE SUBJECT • CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR COTTON AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDANA. DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT JULY 9. I997 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107, FIRST READING i.rn2co Iu ORB m. /N - 1nrA BACKGROUND: This item has been continued from the meetings of April 9th. June 11th. and June 21st. The proposed ordinance pertains to amending Chapter 25- Uniform Codes and Fire Prevention of the City Code. The amendment would do the following: • Establish a required project completion date based upon project valuation and date of building permit issuance. • Establish a penalty fee for projects exceeding the required project completion date This ordinance has been originated because of the increased number of complaints received from irate neighbors of construction projects. They feel that they are unreasonably inconvenienced by property owners who take an unusual amount of time to complete construction projects. An example of such a project is at 770 Chaucer Road. This project has taken 2 y years and has not yet been completed. This project is an example where an owner has extended the project by calling for inspection right before the 180 -day expiration deadline on various phases of the project. A deterrent to lengthy projects. proposed by this ordinance, is a required project completion deadline. Staff proposes a deadline based upon building valuation. A small project should be completed sooner than a large project. Although a large project should be given more time than a small one, the City should require its completion not to exceed say fifteen months. Council should take the liberty to suggest more or less time based on what seems reasonable. As suggested by Councilmember Filutze, kitchen remodels and other similar projects should not be subject to these restrictions. As such, staff has amended the ordinance by exempting all such interior projects. Finally. a penalty fee should be imposed if an owner exceeds the required project completion deadline. Proposed is to require fees to be paid in accordance with the civil enforcement procedures in Article 6 of Chapter 1 established last year with the tree preservation ordinance. This ordinance will not be effective unless the public is properly made aware of its existence. Staff intends to work closely with the San Marino Tribune to distribute information regarding this subject. Also, a 1 • counier sign will be prepared and displayed. Staff is also working on a handout to accompany the issuance of all building permits that will not only cover this issue but also outline allowed construcdon hours. 'these would be in addition to the Guidelines for the Maintenance el Cc+urnrction Sites. Additionally. staff will send notices warning owners before their permits expire. RRCOMMENDATIONI Staff recommends that the City Council approve on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 c: %wp61 kouneiI\bldgoc. jut 2 Ro .a. P Bt t5, kag1 C O V E R FAX S H E E T To: City of Rolling Hills - ATTN: Lola Unger Fax M: (310) 377-7288 Subject: City of San Marino Ordinance No. 097-1107 - Penalties For Violations Date: September 22. 1997 Pages: 10. including this cover sheet. COMMENTS: Lola: Please find attached a copy of City of San Marino Ordinance No. 096-1088 which establishes the administrative procedures and penalties for violations of the City Code, and which the City references in Ordinance No. 097-1107 pertaining to the time within which property owners must complete construction. Section 2 of Ordinance No. 097-1107 concerning Section 01.06.01 of Article 6 of Chapter 1 of the San Marino City Code also refers to violations of sections 23.06.13 and 25.01.04. You will also find copies of these sections of the City Code attached for your information. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me. Ceitz. A.q_e‘dz. From the desk or... CAROL A. R0B6. CMC/AAE City Clerk CRy of San Marino 2200 Huntington Drhe San Marino, CA 91106 (628)300.0706 Fax: (826) 300-0109 ORDINANCE NO. Oft -10t• AN ORDINANCE OF TES CITY OF SAN MARINO ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE CITY CODE OF BAN NARiN0 AND AXENDING THE SAN MARINO CITY CODs THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Article 06 of Chapter I of the City Code of San Marino is added to read as follows: 01.06.01 SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following section of the San Marino City Code: 23.06.13. 01.06.02 DEFINITIONS: The following words and phrases, when used in the context of this Article, shall have the following meanings: A. ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of the San Marino City Code. B. LEGAL INTEREST: Any interest that is represented by a deed of trust, quitclaim deed, mortgage, judgment lien, tax or assessment lien, mechanic's lien or other similar instrument, which is recorded with the County Recorder. C. RESPONSIBLE PERSON: Any person who an Enforcement Official determines is responsible for causing or maintaining a public nuisance or a violation of the City Code or applicable state codes. The term "Responsible Person" includes but is not limited to a property owner, tenant, person with a Legal Interest in real property or person in possession of real property. 01.06.03 AUTHORITY: Any person violating any section of this Code that .is subject to this Article nay be issued an administrative citation by an Enforcement Official as provided in this Article. 01.06.04 PENALTIES: An administrative penalty shall be assessed by means of an administrative citation issued by the Enforcement Official, and shall be payable directly to the City Treasurer. Penalties shall be collected in accordance with the procedures specified in this Article. 01.06.05 CONTINUING VIOLATIONS: It shall constitute a new and separate offense for each and every day, or portion thereof, during which a violation of, or failure to comply with, any provision or requirement of this Code is committed, continued, or permitted by any person. The time period for computing the number of days a violation has continued for 960131 57130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 i purposes of this Section shall commence on and shall include the date of service of the Administrative Order, the date the Administrative Order otherwise provides, or for oontinuing violations of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning codes, 30 days following receipt of service of the Administrative Order, whichever date is applicable pursuant to Section 01.06.14. 01.06.06 PROCEDURES POR ISSUING ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS: Upon discovering a violation of any section of this Code that is subject to this Article, an Enforcement Official may issue an administrative citation, on a fora approved by the City Manager, to a Responsible Person, as follows: A. If the Responsible Person is a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate any one of the following individuals and issue to that individual an administrative citations the president or other head of the corporation, a vice-president, a secretary or assistant secretary, a treasurer or assistant treasurer, a general manager, or a person authorized by the corporation to receive service of process in a civil action. If the office address of any of the above -listed individuals is known to the City, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to one of those individuals by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. B. If the Responsible Person is a business other than a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate the business owner and issue the business owner an administrative citation. If the Enforcement Official can locate only the manager of the business, the administrative citation may be given to the manager of the business. If the address of the business is known, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to the business owner or Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. C. The Enforcement Official shall attempt to obtain on the administrative citation the signature of the Responsible Person, or in cases in which the Responsible Person is a corporation or business, the signature of the person served with the administrative citation. If the Responsible Person or person served refuses or fails to sign the administrative citation, the failure or refusal to sign shall not affect the validity of the citation or of subsequent proceedings. 960131 67130-00001 tpp 1330649 0 - 2 - D. If the Enforcement Official is unable to locate the Responsible Person for the violation, the administrative oitation shall be mailed to the Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. E. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, or by certified mail or regular mail, the Enforcement Official shall picot the City in administrative citation on any real property Legal Interest,has and such poste ingtshalle Rbe deemedeeffectivehas a Legal F. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, by certified mail or regular mail, and the City is not aware that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest in any real property within the City, the Enforcement Official shall cause the administrative citation to be published in a newspaper likely to give actual notice to the on shall fourRsuccessive weeks �inTaenewspapergpublishedb fore once a week at least once a week. G. The Enforcement Official shall sign the administrative citation. 01.06.07 CONTENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS: Administrative citations shall contain all of the following information: A. The date and location of the violation and the approximate time the violation was observed. B. The City Code section violated and a description of how the section was violated. C. The action required to correct the violation. D. The consequences of failing to correct the violation. E. The amount of penalty imposed for the violation. F. The date, time, and place of the administrative hearing on the violation and the consequences for failing to attend the hearing. G. The signature of the Enforcement Official, and the signature of the Responsible Person if that person can be located and will sign the citation, as set forth in Section 01.06.06. 960131 17130-00001 tpp 1310049 0 - 3 01.06.08 PE$$ALTIld Aa$EB8ED: A. If a violation of the City Code or applicable state code section was defined as an infraction by the City Code before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation, the penalty assessed shall not exceeds 1. $100 for the first violation. 2. $200 for the second violation of the same City Code or applicable state code section within one year. 3. $500 for eaoh additional violation of the same city Cods or applicable state cods section within one year. B. If a violation of the City Code or applicable state code section was punishable as a misdemeanor before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation the penalty assessed shall not exceed $1,000. C. The penalty assessed for violations of ordinances that are adopted after this Article is adopted, and that are subject to this Article, shall not exceed $1,000. D. All penalties assessed shall be payable to the City Treasurer. E. Payment of a penalty shall not excuse the failure to correct the violation nor shall it bar further enforcement action by the City. 01.06.09 TIME FOR ADMINISTRATIVE BEARING: The City shall conduct an administrative hearing at the date, time, and place indicated on the administrative citation. The hearing shall occur no earlier than fifteen (15) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person and no later than ninety (90) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.10 APPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER: The appropriate Department Director shall appoint an Administrative Hearing Officer. The Department Director may appoint as the Administrative Hearing Officer any member of that Department's staff, but shall neither appoint any Enforcement Official nor any subordinate of any Enforcement Official. 01.06.11 REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF BEARING: The Responsible Person may request one continuance of the hearing, but in no event may the hearing begin later than ninety (90) days after service of the administrative citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.12 PROCEDURES AT ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING: Administrative hearings are informal, and formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. Each party shall have the opportunity to present evidence in support of his or her case and 960131 $7130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 4 3 to cross-examine witnesses. The City bears the burden of proof at an administrative hearing to establish a violation of the City Cods. The Administrative Hearing Officer must use preponderanoe of evidence as the standard of evidence in deciding the issues. 01.06.13 IAILURE TO ATTEND ADMINISTRATIVE NEARING* If the Responsible Person fails to attend the scheduled hearing, the hearing will proceed without the Responsible Person, and he or she will be deemed to have waived his or her right to an administrative hearing. Notwithstanding this waiver and the time limits set forth in Section 01.06.09, if service of the administrative citation is made by posting the citation on real property within the City in which the Responsible Person has a Legal Interest, and the Responsible Person provides verifiable and substantial evidence that removal of the citation from the property by a third party caused the Responsible Person's failure to attend the scheduled hearing, the Responsible Person shall be entitled to an administrative hearing. 01.06.14 DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SEARING OFFICER: The administrative hearing officer shall issue a written decision entitled "Administrative Order" no later than fifteen (15) days after the date on which the administrative hearing concludes. The Administrative Order shall be served upon the Responsible Person by any one of the methods set forth in Section 01.06.06 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall become final on the date of service, and shall notify the Responsible Person of his right to appeal as provided in Section 01.06.15 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall also set a deadline for compliance with its terms in the event that the Responsible Person fails to file an appeal. If the violation is a continuing violation of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. 01.06.15 APPEAL or ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: Within 20 days after service of the Administrative Order upon the Responsible Person, he or she may seek review of the Administrative order by filing a notice of appeal with the municipal court. The Responsible Person shall serve upon the City Clerk either in person or by first class mail a copy of the notice of appeal. If the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal, the Administrative Order shall be deemed confirmed. 01.06.16 FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: Failure to comply with a final Administrative Order is a misdemeanor. If the municipal court rules in favor of the City or if the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal in the municipal court, and the Responsible Person then 960131 97130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 5 - cD). fails to comply with the Administrative Order, the City may file a criminal misdemeanor action against the Responsible Person. Filing a oriminal misdemeanor action does not preclude the City from using any other legal remedy available to gain compliance with the Administrative Order. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of March, 1996. AR D $. LeSAGE, MA Attests CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK Approved As To Form: STEVEN L. DORSEY, ITY ATTORNEY I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 096-1088 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting thereof, held on the 13th day of March, 1996, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCIL EMBERS CROWLEY, DRYDEN, FILUTZE, VICE MAYOR COTTON, AND MAYOR LESAGE. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. c:\wp51\ord\civilpen.feb \ord0961.088 960131 $7130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 MIN 6 Nat, A.ggrb CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK IND include, for the purposes of this Section only, any building under actual construction et such date; provided. that such building is completed within one year from such date. (1954 Code 123.27) 23.06.11: REPAIR, RELOCATION OR ALTERATION OF DAMAGED BUILDINGS: No building which has been damaged or partially destroyed to the exteint of more than 50 percent of its replacement value shell be repaired. moved or altered except in conformity with the provisions of this Chapter pertaining to buildings thereafter erected. This Section shell not apply to existing legal non -conforming residential or accessory buildings damaged by fire or earthquake, which may be rebuilt on prior foundations end/or footprints to the preexisting sire, configuration and style. (1964 Code *23.28) 23.06.12: MINIMUM LOT AREA AND WIDTH REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT PREVENT USE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING: The requirements of this Chapter as to minimum lot area and lot width shall not be construed to prevent the construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling on any lot if such lot, prior to July 8. 1994, or the effective date of any amendment thereto making such lot non -conforming, was: A. B. C. D. Shown separately upon an official subdivision map; or Shown by a separate number or letter on a record of survey map filed with the County Recorder of Los Angeles County; or Deeded by a deed of record; or Subject to a contract of sale. Such construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling shall comply with all the applicable development standards of this Chapter in effect at the time of the construction or expansion. (Ord. 094-1056, 6-8-94) 23.06.13: CONSISTENCY WITH HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN: Zone change, conditional use permit, variance and other land use decisions shall be consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan (approved November 30. 1989) relating to Citing and Citing Criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Nothing herein shall limit the ability of the City to attach appropriate conditions to the issuance of any such approval in order to protect the public health, safety or welfare nor to establish more stringent planning requirements or citing criteria than those specified in the County Plan. (Ord. 980, 7-11-90) 23.06.14: PROHIBITION AGAINST INCLUDING PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CERTAIN EASEMENTS FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING SETBACKS. LOT COVERAGE AND SIMILAR REQUIREMENTS: No portion of a parcel burdened by an easement. other than an easement for utility purposes, which effectively precludes use of City of San Marino �a� 25.01.04 25.01.05 25.01.04: PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS: Any person who violates or causes or permits any person to violate Section 25.01.01 of this Article shall be required, at the time of obtaining the permits required by this Chapter, to pay a penalty equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the total amount of all permit fees assessed for the construction work or activity pursuant to this Chapter In addition to the amount of the permit fees. (Ord. 092.1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.05: PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBLE: The property owner or occupant of any property at which a violation of this Chapter shall occur shall be responsible for and liable for charges provided for In Section 25.01.04 of this Article. (Ord. 092-1015, 8-10-92) City of San Marino _ej 25.01.01 25.01.02 ARTICLE 01 GENERAL PROVISIONS SECTION: 25.01.01: 25.01.02: 25.01.03: 25.01.04: 25.01.05: Permits Required Times Construction Prohibited Work by Owner Permitted Penalty for Violations Property Owner Responsible 25.01.01: PERMITS REQUIRED: it shall be unlawful for any person to begin or perform any construction work or construction activity or to cause or permit any construction work or construction activity, for which a permit Is required by this Chapter, to begin or perform on any residential or commercial parcel of property without having first obtained said permit. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.02: TIMES CONSTRUCTION PROHIBITED: It shall be unlawful for any person to perform or to cause or permit to be performed any construction work or construction activity for which a permit Is required by this Chapter or for any person requiring a business license pursuant to Chapter XI of this City Code to perform or to cause or permit to be performed any construction work or construction activity on the following days: (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) A. On Mondays through Fridays, before seven o'clock (7:00) A.M. and after six o'clock (6:00) P.M.; except, that the Director of Planning and Building may authorize, In. connection with seismic upgrading or fire sprinkler Installation, construction work or activity In the C-1 Zone to be performed outside between six o'clock (6:00) P.M. and nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. and inside an enclosed building after nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. Such construction work or activity shall be performed in compliance with any conditions the Director of Planning and Building shall impose to alleviate potential disturbance to surrounding properties. City of San Marino Cuy ofiePP,�,.q Jd.•PP INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 7-B Mtg. Date: 02/09/98 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED BUILDING PROJECTS. DATE: FEBRUARY 9, 1998 BACKGROUND On October 27, 1997, the City Council received a staff report regarding prolonged building projects and a City of San Marino Ordinance that established fines for projects which are not completed within a specified time period. This report was prepared following presentation of information to the City Council by Mr. and Mrs. John Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive. At that meeting, staff was directed to observe the implementation of the San Marino Ordinance and provide a status report. This report is designed to provide the City Council with a status on the City of San Marino's activities. A copy of the staff report that was presented to the City Council on October 27, 1997 is attached for your information. CITY OF SAN MARINO PHILOSOPHY OF THE ORDINANCE Staff spoke to San Marino City Attorney Steve Dorsey to gather information on this Ordinance. The Ordinance adopted by the City of San Marino does not amend the Building Code. According to Mr. Dorsey, State Law requires that amendments to local Building Codes must be based on local climactic, geological or topographic conditions. It seem unlikely that there are such local conditions that would support unique building construction time limits in Rolling Hills. Further, revoking a building permit due to lengthy construction would seem counter productive to securing the timely completion of the project. -1- 1.0t Panted on Recycled Pape, The Ordinance adopted by San Marino established language in the Municipal Code that sets forth penalties for failure to complete construction projects within specified time limits, without invalidating the building permit. The philosophy of this Ordinance is that fines for lengthy construction would be more effective than revoking the building permit and that the economic disincentive of the fines will cause construction to continue at an appropriate pace. Under the San Marino Ordinance, if a project is not completed under the specified. time frame established pursuant to the valuation of the project, a 30 -day notice indicating that the City will be assessing an administrative penalty against the owner will be provided to that property owner. This provides another 30 day time period for the project to be completed without penalty. To date, the City of San Marino has not implemented this Ordinance against any projects because there have not been any violations. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that members of the City Council consider this report and receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. Staff will provide an update to the City Council when the City of San Marino has experience administrating this Ordinance. CRN:mlk prolonged.sta • Cu y `RJ/1, Jd,•fl. INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mait cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 9.B, Mtg. Date: 10/27/97 DATE: OCTOBER 27, 1997 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. BACKGROUND At the September 22, 1997 City Council meeting, Councilmembers requested that staff study the issue of prolonged building projects. This action followed the receipt of the attached letter and the appearance of Mr. and Mrs. John Heater at the meeting regarding the Juge property at 61 Eastfield Drive that has been under construction since January 1988 (almost 10 years). The Heaters referred to the attached newspaper article about the City of San Marino's Ordinance pertaining to deadlines for construction projects. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS The majority of new residential construction projects in the City of Rolling Hills are rarely completed within a two year window due to the large estate -size residences proposed that usually take longer than two years to complete. During the construction period, projects are sometimes prone to scheduling difficulties as a result of weather conditions or financing. ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION The Rolling Hills Community Association has been considering the attached draft resolution for some time that is entitled, A RESOLUTION TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 1 ®Printed on Recycled Pace* CONSTRUCTION WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. The draft resolution addresses future adverse aesthetic and safety impacts of major construction projects that exceed $250,000. The resolution as proposed requires that the property owner and Association agree on a Substantial Completion Date and that the property owner provide a completion bond so that the Association can make claim for the completion bond or liquidated damages. The Community Association will review the proposed resolution again on October 23, 1997 and staff will update the City Council of any Community Association action taken at their meeting. CITY OF SAN MARINO San Marino's Ordinance has been reviewed and will be addressed by City Attorney, Michael Jenkins. We inquired and received the attached information from Ms. Carol A. Robb, City of San Marino City Clerk. The City of San Marino adopted Ordinance No. 097-1107 on September 10, 1997 requiring that construction projects be completed within certain time limits in accordance with valuations and subject to penalty fees if a project is not completed within those time limits. The time limits range from a 6 month completion time for valuations up to $50,000 and a 15 month time limit for valuations over $250,000. Penalties imposed range from $100 up to $1,000 per infraction (i.e., misdemeanor infraction). There is no Community Association in the City of San Marino. NEARBY Cl'1'LES The City of Rolling Hills Estates requires that projects commence within 6 months of approval. They do not have any prolonged projects but, the city could declare a prolonged project substandard and require it to be demolished or completed. This usually represents a lengthy process that may lead to litigation. Planning officials in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are in the process of formulating an amendment to the municipal code to enforce deadlines on projects. We will monitor this and provide updates as necessary. The City of Palos Verdes Estates applies a certain amount of working days to a particular project which may be extended by staff for six months for one time only. Further extensions may be established by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 2 jnh 1111 1 leiter r n i•!1 7• ti D SEP 24. 1997 CITY OF RS:Li- .:: ;-iiLLS By 12 September, 1997 City Council, City of Rolling Hills: Board of Directors, Rolling Hills Community Association Dear Friends: Please note an article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12th. 1997 regarding the action some local cities are taking about prolonged building projects. The Juge property next door to us. at 61 F.astfield Drive has been going on for ten long nears. This has presented us with a very ugly, unpleasant and aggravating situation. It certainly does not seem to be in keeping with the high standards of life in this lovely community. We sincerely hope that the Board of Directors will see fit to enact some sort of ordinance concerning a time limit for construction projects in this City. Perhaps you will want to communicate with the City Council of San Marino to find out how they are proceeding on this issue. Sincerely, °1P-6‘ittit° 4,toWt raaa lSojk, SS ttst(itll 3110 relight co 31274 hat (3111311-2141 Oct (311) 544-1111 • • ROLLING HILLS REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Offered by John and Doreen Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive From our point of view, it's not the same Rolling Hills we moved to in 1956! The condition that has affected our view for over ten years is the excessively prolonged house -building ordeal next door to us to the south. We have lived with the noise, the dust, the general disruption all this while. It has not been pleasant. This debaucle has certainly affected our property value. And others up and down Eastfield Drive. Here is a brief list of the problems we have experienced: Violation of easement rights: Initial placement of a hurricane fence crossed over the easement entrance Plan included a planting in the middle of the easement entrance Now driveway down the easement has been elevated to the extent that an access pathway to our rear lower level is impossible to use,— too steep. Wall built into our casement and property, necessitating our having a survey to prove the encroachment. Tractor work on Sundays Auto parking in the easement (his driveway) The first. and foremost problem - approval of such incompatible plans given the sixe of the building pad. Now, we believe there are solutions for our problems, and all others like them in the City. We refer you to the clipped article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12 regarding actions enacted by San Marino to correct just exactly these sorts of neighborhood control problems. Why cannot Rolling Hills control the building projects whithin the city? Each time we have complained about the excessive construction time we are advised the matter is out of the city's hands - the County governs. This certainly seems to be a "cop-out", sacrificing our authority to govern what occurs in our city to an outside bureaucracy. Is there a conclusion to this problem? Yes! Pass time limit laws on construction projects It is in the hands of our local elected officials. Sincerely, M RUDA'. SEM:MISER I2. Vir • yt� EWS IN BRIEF A summary of developments across Los Angeles County So Bain Law Imposes Time Limit on Construction Projects The City Council. Ured of con- struclion projects that leave neigh - bore enduring noise, dust and un- sightly lots for years, has enacted a law that levies fines for failure to complete work within a designated time. The city 1s among the first in the San Gabriel Valley to impose a timetableapproved for by the couder the ncil ers. late law, Wednesday, a property owner would have six months o complete a $50,000 project, nine months 5100,000 project and a year to finish. a 5250,000 project. The fine for running over schedule would be double the cost of the initial build- ing permit, officials said. City Manager Debbie Bell said mounting complaints about a handful of projects around the city led officials to make the change. One house remodeling project has dragged on for three years, longer than any other residential project in the city. Residents say a number of sites in the city seem to be permanent homes for work crews, concrete mixers and dozens of tracks.y that Many cities require builders show work is continuing to get a new building permit every six months. Pasadena officials are consider- ing a similar law. Residents of the South San Rafael Avenue area in Pasadena have protested a massive make -over of amasion years.t ha But lasted nearly seven Pasadena building officials nsaid an- other project l Hills has lasted two decades as one man has single-handedly remod- eled a home. TITLE OF FtESOLUTION: TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. Purpose: To avoid the considerable future adverse aesthetic and safety impact on the Community Association and its members caused by the failure to complete construction of buildings within a reasonable time period. Definitions: For the purpose of this Resolution the phrase "Substantial Completion" shall mean that all exterior construction, roofing, painting, glazing, and other finishing called for on the building's approved plans have been completed so it appears from the outside as completed, together with installation of all approved hardscape and landscaping, irrigation systems, and removal of temporary fencing, power, and sanitation. The "Substantial Completion Date" shall mean the date the project is Substantially Completed as defined herein. "Major Construction" shall be interpreted to mean any residential or ancillary new or remodel building project involving an estimated cost exceeding $250,000, which in the opinion of the Association, involves construction work visible by neighbors or from Association roadways or trails. Resolved That: It shall be the policy of the Association as to all Major Construction to require as part of the permitting process that the Owner and the Association mutually agree to a reasonable Substantial Completion Date for the proposed improvements to reach the stage of Substantial Completion and to establish either the time and amount of a completion bond to be purchased by applicant in a form and amount satisfactory to Association, or the monthly amount which reasonably equals the liquidated damages to the Association and the members caused by a failure to Substantially Complete the improvements by the Substantial Completion Date. Failure to Substantially Complete by 1 i the Substantial Completion Date shall constitute a "Default" permitting Association to make claim against the completion bond or for the liquidated damages. The amount per month of liquidated damages shall be prorated on the basis of a 30 -day month for partial months and such amounts due the last day of each month and shall bear interest at 10% simple interest from the month -end of accrual until paid in full. Provided however, in the event of a Default, the Owner shall have an additional 45 - calendar day "Grace Period" within which to cause the improvements to be Substantially Completed and if the Owner achieves Substantial Completion within the Grace Period, the Association's rights and claims hereunder will be waived, but failure to achieve Substantial Completion within the Grace Period shall result in the Association's claims against the bonding company or for liquidated damages to be measured from the first date of Default. Upon written request and documentation supporting same filed by Owner, the Board in its sole discretion may grant one or more, but not to exceed 60 -day extensions, to the Substantial Completion Date due to unforeseen delays determined to be caused by Acts of God or other special unforeseeable circumstance, subject to such conditions as the Board may reasonably impose as a material part of such an extension. However, insufficient construction funds and/or failure of a contractor to perform its obligations shall generally not be considered a basis for extending the Substantial Completion Date. The Board may enforce its rights hereunder in the same manner as any other delinquent assessment against a Homeowner, including filing, and foreclosure upon, its lien for amounts due plus interest provided herein. _. �r �ni� ��il��iirU I LI-• S., - - - r . I 1 , 1 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT AGENDA ITEM CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR FILUTZE AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AVID A. SALDARA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT SEPTEMBER 10, 1997 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107. 2nd Reading RE: MAXIMUM TIME LIMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS BACKGROUND; On August 13, 1997, Council approved on first reading, Ordinance No. 097-1107. This pertains to the establishment of a maximum time limit for the completion of construction projects. According to the ordinance a property owner will be subject to the payment of penalty fees by the City if work is not completed within a specific period of time. The deadlines vary in relationship to the project's valuation. For example, a small project under $50,000 in valuation would be required to be completed within six (6) months. A larger project having a valuation greater than $250,000 would be required to be completed within fifteen (15) months. Additionally, a provision would authorize the Planning and Building Director discretion to grant an extension to the required completion date if the project has been delayed beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Violations would be enforced and penalties imposed in the same manner as violations of the Tree Preservation Ordinance RECOMMENDATION; Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on second reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 c:\wp611camcilmaxme.sep co f.i or : ;AN MARIN() C'lL) TO FROM DATE SUBJECT CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR FILUTZB AND MEMBERS OP THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDA1 A, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AGENDA AUGUST 13, 1997 ITEM ORDINANCE NO.097-1107.1st Reading CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COMPLETION DEADLINES BACKGROUND: Last month, staff presented the City Council with a proposed ordinance that would place time limitations on commercial and residential construction projects. This proposal is a result of an increased number of resident complaints regarding the excessive period of time that some property owners take in completing a construction project. The main example is 770 Chaucer where this remodeling project has taken over 2 IA years and has not been completed. The residual noise, debris, traffic, and overall unattractiveness of building projects can only be tolerated within a reasonable time period by surrounding residents from a project. The City Council was in agreement with the concept of this ordinance following further amendments by the City Attorney. The amended ordinance is attached for your consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO AMENDING THE SAN MARINO CITY CODE REGARDING THE TIME WITHIN WHICH PROPERTY OWNERS MUST COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, Property owners sometimes take an excessively long period of time to complete a construction project; and WHEREAS, delayed completion of construction for unreasonably long periods of time subjects neighboring property owners to unnecessary adverse impacts from construction noises and unsightliness caused by dead landscaping and storage of construction materials, equipment, trash, and portable toilets; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to encourage development projects that improve the appearance of properties and maintain high property values, but wants to prevent unreasonably lengthy construction projects that negatively affect surrounding properties; and WHEREAS, establishing a reasonable completion date for construction projects is necessary to protect neighborhoods from the adverse impacts of lengthy projects. ME CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 of Article 01, Title XXV of the San Marino City Code are renumbered as Sections 25.01.06 and 25.01.07, respectively, and new Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 are added to Article 1 of Title XXV to read as follows: 25.01.04 COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. Unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 25.01.05, each person owning property for which a building permit has been issued pursuant to Article 2 of Title XXV of the San Marino City Code shall cause all work authorized by said permit to be completed within the time limits specified below from the date of issuance of the building permit; VALUATION PROJECT COMPLETION TIME Up to $50,000 $50,001 to $100,000 $100,001 to S250,000 $250,001 and over 6 months 9 months 12 months 15 months The valuation shall be the same valuation determined by the Building Official upon issuance of the building permit. 9 r,nr..i.0 L L •� 1 v- �V li V '� CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 PAGE TWO 25.01.05: EXTENSION OF COMPLETION DATES. TheD3irectorof Planning and Bullring may grant an extension of a completion date established pursuant to Section 25:01.04 if the Director finds that the project has been performed as expeditiously as reasonably possible and in a manner to reasonably accommodate the needs of persons residing in the neighborhood and that the delay in completion of construction was beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Decisions of the Director on whether to grant an extension may be appealed to the Planning Commission and from the Planning Commission to the City Council. Applications for an extension must be submitted no earl than two months prior to the expiration date and no later than one month prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Section 01.06.01 of Article 6 of Chapter I, of the San Marino City Code is amended to read as follows: 01.06.01: SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following sections of the San Marino City Code: a) 23.06.13; and b) 25.01.04. Section 3: The second paragraph of Section 01.06.13 of Chapter I of the San Marino City Code is amended to read as follows: If the violation is a continuing violation of Section 25.01.04 or of the building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of September, 1997. ATTEST: CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK �i Jnrr � .r'..•. t ivv I Li-. _ .v !'J 'J1 V� CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO.097-1107 PAGE THREE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 097-1107 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting of the City Council held on the 10th day of September, by the following vote: AYES COUNCILMEMBERS BROWN, COTTON, DRYDEN, . AND VICE MAYOR CROWLEY. NOES NONE. ABSTAIN MAYOR FILUTZE. ABSENT NONE. Cam, 0. ie CAROL A. ROI3B, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK 1 I I ur I LL •�1G-JV•J TO FROM DATE SUBJECT ORDINANCE NO. 097-110/. FIRST READING LJFESPAN OF BUILDING PRRMIT3 CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR COTTON AND MEMBERS OP THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDANA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT JULY 9, 1997 BACKGROUND; This item has been continued from the meetings of April 9th. June llth, and June 21st. The proposed ordinance pertains to amending Chapter 25- Uniform Codes and Fire Prevention of the City Code. The amendment would do the following: • Establish a required project completion date based upon project valuation and date of building permit issuance. • Establish a penalty fee for projects exceeding the required project completion date This ordinance has been originated because of the increased number of complaints received from irate neighbors of construction projects. They feel that they are unreasonably inconvenienced by property owners who take an unusual amount of time to complete construction projects. An example of such a project is at 770 Chaucer Road. This project has taken 2 1/2 years and has not yet been completed. This project is an example where an owner has extended the project by calling for inspection right before the 180 -day expiration deadline on various phases of the project. A deterrent to lengthy projects, proposed by this ordinance, is a required project completion deadline. Staff proposes a deadline based upon building valuation. A small project should be completed sooner than a large project. Although a large project should be given more time than a small one, the City should require its completion not to exceed say fifteen months. Council should take the liberty to suggest more or less time based on what seems reasonable. As suggested by Councilmember Filutze, kitchen remodels and other similar projects should not be subject to these restrictions. As such, staff has amended the ordinance by exempting all such interior projects. Finally, a penalty fee should be imposed if an owner exceeds the required project completion deadline. Proposed is to require fees to be paid in accordance with the civil enforcement procedures in Article 6 of Chapter 1 established last year with the tree preservation ordinance. This ordinance will not be effective unless the public is properly made aware of its existence. Staff intends to work closely with the San Marino Tribune to distribute information regarding this subject. Also. a 1 C� �rtI...vu . Is, counter sign will be prepared and displayed. Staff is also working on a handout to accompany the issuance of all building permits that will not only cover this issue but also outline allowed construction hours. These would be in addition to the Guidelines for the Maintenance of Construction Sites. Additionally, staff will send notices warning owners before their permits expire. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 c: \wp61 \council\bldgcc. jul 2 Tu ROs�u� o•. C.; a4`t Cc" "a. fi"""g at 1.5% Vkq't O V E R FAX S H E E T To: City of Rolling Hills - ATTN: Lola Unger Fax I#: (310) 377-7288 Subject: City of San Marino Ordinance No. 097-1107 - Penalties For Violations Date: September 22, 1997 Pages: 10, including this cover sheet. COMMENTS: Lola: Please find attached a copy of City of San Marino Ordinance No. 096-1088 which establishes the administrative procedures and penalties for violations of the City Code, and which the City references in Ordinance No. 097-1107 pertaining to the time within which property owners must complete construction. Section 2 of Ordinance No. 097-1107 concerning Section 01.06.01 of Article 6 of Chapter I of the San Marino City Code also refers to violations of sections 23.06.13 and 25.01.04. You will also find copies of these sections of the City Code attached for your information. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me. From the desk of... CAROL A. R013a, CMC/AAE City Clerk City of San Marino 2200 Huntington Drive San Marino, CA 91108 (628) 300-0706 Fax: (826) 300-0709 _ 1 i r ur --r ORDINANCE 91O. 096-106$ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF BAN MARINO AND AMENDING THE CODE SAN MARINO PROCEDURES AND THE CITY CODE OF SAN MARINO CITY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Article 06 of Chapter I of the City Code of San Marino is added to read as follows: 01.06.01 SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following section of the San Marino City Code: 23.06.13. 01.06.02 DEFINITIONS: The following words and phrases, when used in the context of this Article, shall have the following meanings: A. ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of the San Marino City Code. B. LEGAL INTEREST: Any interest that is represented by a deed of trust, quitclaim deed, mortgage, judgment lien, tax or assessment lien, mechanic's lien or other similar instrument, which is recorded with the County Recorder. C. RESPONSIBLE PERSON: Any person who an Enforcement Official determines is responsible for causing or maintaining a public nuisance or a violation of the City Code or applicable state codes. The term "Responsible Person" includes but is not limited to a property owner, tenant, person with a Legal Interest in real property or person in possession of real property. 01.06.03 AUTHORITY: Any person violating any section of this Code that .is subject to this Article may be issued an administrative citation by an Enforcement Official as provided in this Article. 01.06.04 PENALTIES: An administrative penalty shall be assessed by means of an administrative citation issued by the Enforcement Official, and shall be payable directly to the City Treasurer. Penalties shall be collected in accordance with the procedures specified in this Article. 01.06.05 CONTINUING VIOLATIONS: It shall constitute a new and separate offense for each and every day, or portion thereof, during which a violation of, or failure to comply with, any provision or requirement of this Code is committed, continued, or permitted by any person. The time period for computing the number of days a violation has continued for 960131 S7130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 purposes of this Section shall commence on and shall include the date of service of the Administrative Order, the date the Administrative Order otherwise provides, or for continuing violations of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning codes, 30 days following receipt of service of the Administrative Order, whichever date is applicable pursuant to Section 01.06.14. 01.06.06 PROCEDURES FOR ISSUING ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONBS Upon discovering a violation of any section of this Code that is subject to this Article, an Enforcement Official may issue an administrative citation, on a form approved by the city Manager, to a Responsible Person, as follows: A. If the Responsible Person is a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate any one of the following individuals and issue to that individual an administrative citation: the president or other head of the corporation, a vice-president, a secretary or assistant secretary, a treasurer or assistant treasurer, a general manager, or a person authorized by the corporation to receive service of process in a civil action. If the office address of any of the above -listed individuals is known to the City, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to one of those individuals by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. B. If the Responsible Person is a business other than a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate the business owner and issue the business owner an administrative citation. If the Enforcement Official can locate only the manager of the business, the administrative citation may be given to the manager of the business. If the address of the business is known, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to the business owner or Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. C. The Enforcement Official shall attempt to obtain on the administrative citation the signature of the Responsible Person, or in cases in which the Responsible Person is a corporation or business, the signature of the person served with the administrative citation. If the Responsible Person or person served refuses or fails to sign the administrative citation, the failure or refusal to sign shall not affect the validity of the citation or of subsequent proceedings. 960131 57130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 2 - D. If the Enforcement Official is unable to locate the Responsible Person for the violation, the administrative citation shall be mailed to the Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. E. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, or by certified mail or regular mail, the Enforcement Official shall post the administrative citation on any real property within the City in which the City Legal Interest, hand such as eposting dge tshall the Rbe de medeeffective s a service. F. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, by certified mail or regular mail, and the City is not aware that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest in any real property within the City, the Enforcement Official shall cause the administrative citation to be published in a newspaper likely to give actual notice to the Responsible Party. The publication shall be once a week for four successive weeks in a newspaper published at least once a week. G. The Enforcement Official shall sign the administrative citation. 01.06.07 CONTENT OF ADXINI8TRATIVN CITATIONS: Administrative citations shall contain all of the following information: A. The date and location of the violation and the approximate time the violation was observed. B. The City Code section violated and a description of how the section was violated. C. The action required to correct the violation. D. The consequences of failing to correct the violation. E. The amount of penalty imposed for the violation. F. The date, time, and place of the administrative hearing on the violation and the consequences for failing to attend the hearing. G. The signature of the Enforcement Official, and the signature of the Responsible Person if that person can be located and will sign the citation, as set forth in Section 01.06.06. 960131 117130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 3 �tLV rlr 4.1L e 01.06.08 PENALTIES ASSESSED: A. If a violation of the City Code or applicable state code section was defined as an infraction by the City Code before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation, the penalty assessed shall not exceed: 1. $100 for the first violation. 2. $200 for the second violation of the same City Code or applicable state code section within one year. 3. $500 for each additional violation of the same City Code or applicable state code section within one year. B. If a violation of the City Code or applicable state code section was punishable as a misdemeanor before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation the penalty assessed shall not exceed $1,000. C. The penalty assessed for violations of ordinances that are adopted after this Article is adopted, and that are subject to this Article, shall not exceed $1,000. D. All penalties assessed shall be payable to the City Treasurer. E. Payment of a penalty shall not excuse the failure to correct the violation nor shall it bar further enforcement action by the City. 01.06.09 TIME FOR ADMINISTRATIVE BEARING: The City shall conduct an administrative hearing at the date, time, and place indicated on the administrative citation. The hearing shall occur no earlier than fifteen (15) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person and no later than ninety (90) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.10 APPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER: The appropriate Department Director shall appoint an Administrative Hearing Officer. The Department Director may appoint as the Administrative Hearing Officer any member of that Department's staff, but shall neither appoint any Enforcement Official nor any subordinate of any Enforcement Official. 01.06.11 REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF HEARING: The Responsible Person may request one continuance of the hearing, but in no event may the hearing begin later than ninety (90) days after service of the administrative citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.12 PROCEDURES AT ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING: Administrative hearings are informal, and formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. Each party shall have the opportunity to present evidence in support of his or her case and 960131 87130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 4 3 -r /') to cross-examine witnesses. The City bears the burden of proof at an administrative hearing to establish a violation of the City Code. The Administrative Hearing Officer must use preponderance of evidence as the standard of evidence in deciding the issues. 01.06.13 FAILUU TO ATTEND ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING: If the Responsible Person fails to attend the scheduled hearing, the hearing will proceed without the Responsible Person, and he or she will be deemed to have waived his or her right to an administrative hearing. Notwithstanding this waiver and the time limits set forth in Section 01.06.09, if service of the administrative citation is made by posting the citation on real property within the City in which the Responsible Person has a Legal Interest, and the Responsible Person provides verifiable and substantial evidence that removal of the citation from the property by a third party caused the Responsible Person's failure to attend the scheduled hearing, the Responsible Person shall be entitled to an administrative hearing. 01.06.14 DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REARING OFFICER: The administrative hearing officer shall issue a written decision entitled "Administrative Order" no later than fifteen (15) days after the date on which the administrative hearing concludes. The Administrative Order shall be served upon the Responsible Person by any one of the methods set forth in Section 01.06.06 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall become final on the date of service, and shall notify the Responsible Person of his right to appeal as provided in Section 01.06.15 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall also set a deadline for compliance with its terms in the event that the Responsible Person fails to file an appeal. If the violation is a continuing violation of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. 01.06.15 APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: Within 20 days after service of the Administrative Order upon the Responsible Person, he or she may seek review of the Administrative Order by filing a notice of appeal with the municipal court. The Responsible Person shall serve upon the City Clerk either in person or by first class mail a copy of the notice of appeal. If the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal, the Administrative Order shall be deemed confirmed. 01.06.16 FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: Failure to comply with a final Administrative Order is a misdemeanor. If the municipal court rules in favor of the City or if the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal in the municipal court, and the Responsible Person then 960131 87130-00001 tpp 1330669 0 - 5 c9 fails to comply with the Administrative Order, the City may file a criminal misdemeanor action against the Responsible Person. Filing a oriminal.a►isdemeanor action does not preclude the City from using any other legal remedy available to gain compliance with the Administrative Order. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of March, 1996. ARD E. LeSAGE, MA Attest: CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK Approved As To Form: STEVEN L. DORSEY,(ftITY ATTORNEY. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing. Ordinance No. 096-1088 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting thereof, held on the 13th day of March, 1996, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS CROWLEY, DRYDEN, FILUTZE, VICE MAYOR COTTON, AND MAYOR LESAGE. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. c:\wp51\ord\civilpen.feb \ord0961.088 960131 !7130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 00 6 CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK include, for the purposes of this Section only, any building under actual construction at such date; provided. that such building is completed within one year from such date. (1964 Code 423.27) 23.06.11: REPAIR, RELOCATION OR ALTERATION OF DAMAGED BUILDINGS: No building which has been damaged or partially destroyed to the extent of more than 50 percent of its replacement value shall be repaired, moved or altered except in conformity with the provisions of this Chapter pertaining to buildings thereafter erected. This Section shall not apply to existing legal non -conforming residential or accessory buildings damaged by fire or earthquake, which may be rebuilt on prior foundations end/or footprints to the preexisting size, configuration and style. (1954 Code 423.28) 23.06.12: MINIMUM LOT AREA AND WIDTH REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT PREVENT USE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING: The requirements of this Chapter as to minimum lot area and lot width shall not be construed to prevent the construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling on any lot if such lot, prior to July 8. 1994, or the effective date of arty amendment thereto making such lot non -conforming, was: A. B. C. D. Shown separately upon an official subdivision map; or Shown by a separate number or letter on a record of survey map filed with the County Recorder of Los Angeles County; or Deeded by a deed of record; or Subject to a contract of sale. Such construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling shall comply with all the applicable development standards of this Chapter in effect at the time of the construction or expansion. (Ord. 094-1056, 6-8-94) 23.06.13: CONSISTENCY WITH HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN: Zone change, conditional use permit, variance and other land use decisions shall be consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan (approved November 30, 1989) relating to Citing and Citing Criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Nothing herein shall limit the ability of the City to attach appropriate conditions to the issuance of any such approval in order to protect the public health, safety or welfare nor to establish more stringent planning requirements or citing criteria than those specified in the County Plan. (Ord. 980, 7-11-90) • 23.06.14: PROHIBITION AGAINST INCLUDING PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CERTAIN EASEMENTS FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING SETBACKS, LOT COVERAGE AND SIMILAR REQUIREMENTS: No portion of a parcel burdened by an easement, other than an easement for utility purposes, which effectively precludes use of City of San Marino �a� 25.01.04 25.01.05 ---1A 25.01.04: PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS: Any person who violates or causes or permits any person to violate Section 25.01.01 of this Article shall be required, at the time of obtaining the permits required by this Chapter, to pay a penalty equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the total amount of all permit fees assessed for the construction work or activity pursuant to this Chapter in addition to the amount of the permit fees. (Ord. 092.1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.05: PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBLE: The property owner or occupant of any property at which a violation of this Chapter shall occur shall be responsible for and liable for charges provided for in Section 25.01.04 of this Article. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) City o/ San Marino 25.01.01 25.01.02 ARTICLE 01 GENERAL. PROVISIONS SECTION: 25.01.01: 25.01.02: 25.01.03: 25.01.04: 25.01.05: Permits Required Times Construction Prohibited Work by Owner Permitted Penalty for Violations Property Owner Responsible ---� 25.01.01: PERMITS REQUIRED: It shall be unlawful for any person to begin or perform any construction work or construction activity or to cause or permit any construction work or construction activity, for which a permit is required by this Chapter, to begin or perform on any residential or commercial parcel of property without having first obtained said permit. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.02: TIMES CONSTRUCTION PROHIBITED: It shall be unlawful for any person to perform or to cause or permit to be performed any construction work or construction activity for which a permit Is required by this Chapter or for any person requiring a business license pursuant to Chapter XI of this City Code to perform or to cause or permit to be performed any construction work or construction activity on the following days: (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) A. On Mondays through Fridays, before seven o'clock (7:00) A.M. and after six o'clock (6:00) P.M.; except, that the Director of Planning and Building may authorize, in. connection with seismic upgrading or fire sprinkler installation, construction work or activity in the C-1 Zone to be performed outside between six o'clock (6:00) P.M. and nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. and inside an enclosed building after nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. Such construction work or activity shall be performed in compliance with any conditions the Director of Planning and Building shall impose to alleviate potential disturbance to surrounding properties. City of San Marino 47&-vieA.( dleofr—+ /nda,;t 61,,_,Ana4-- C'f� ��iUlltil3.•� U�c �,o i�, L • /64,-e -14,143 Aki Ao hiss, JA -410 »i-r cledA--/ G /60/(2 'c- A gel ,06.47 - [ate /16 eon. �, / 0-%.dat -1 vol es f -- vim ,a /i4.� i/�(l unt - r 7t iii Zelv-,scicA,. 2 k, q 0 � — (4 & -ett_sho- ak 6 o'a Adz 44- 30 4441 /45.,,,;04 _4w e, -e YR •f- /oo 17a G,0.1 -a 1 fr44r b‘--- (.7 /5.7 San Marino Ordinance No. 097-1.107 Penalty Description Proiect Completion Time . 6 Months 9 Months 12 Months 15 Months EXTENSION OF COMPLETION DATES Valuation Up to $50,000 $50,001 to $100,000 $100,001 to $250,000 $250,001 and over The Director of Planning and Building may grant an extension of a completion date established pursuant to Section 25.01.04 if the Director finds that the project has been performed as expeditiously as reasonably possible and in a manner to reasonably accommodate the needs of persons residing in the neighborhood and that the delay in completion of construction was beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor.• Decisions of the Director on whether to grant an extension may be appealed to the Planning Commission and from the Planning Commission to the City Council. Applications for an extension must be submitted no earlier than two months prior to the expiration date and no later than one month prior to the expiration date. £'z14 0/ /E)0ff _Jh A INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 9.B. Mtg. Date: 10/27/97 DATE: OCTOBER 27, 1997 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. BACKGROUND At the September 22, 1997 City Council meeting, Councilmembers requested that staff study the issue of prolonged building projects. This action followed the receipt of the attached letter and the appearance of Mr. and Mrs. John Heater at the meeting regarding the Juge property at 61 Eastfield Drive that has been under construction since January 1988 (almost 10 years). The Heaters referred to the attached newspaper article about the City of San Marino's Ordinance pertaining to deadlines for construction projects. CITY OF ROLLING HILLS The majority of new residential construction projects in the City of Rolling Hills are rarely completed within a two year window due to the large estate -size residences proposed that usually take longer than two years to complete. During the construction period, projects are sometimes prone to scheduling difficulties as a result of weather conditions or financing. ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION The Rolling Hills Community Association has been considering the attached draft resolution for some time that is entitled, A RESOLUTION TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECT'S PAGE 1 ire Printed on Recycled Paper. CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. The draft resolution addresses future adverse aesthetic and safety impacts of major construction projects that exceed $250,000. The resolution as proposed requires that the property owner and Association agree on a Substantial Completion Date and that the property owner provide a completion bond so that the Association can make claim for the completion bond or liquidated damages. The Community Association will review the proposed resolution again on October 23, 1997 and staff will update the City Council of any Community Association action taken at their meeting. CITY OF SAN MARINO San Marino's Ordinance has been reviewed and will be addressed by City Attorney, Michael Jenkins. We inquired and received the attached information from Ms. Carol A. Robb, City of San Marino City Clerk. The City of San Marino adopted Ordinance No. 097-1107 on September 10, 1997 requiring that construction projects be completed within certain time limits in accordance with valuations and subject to penalty fees if a project is not completed within those time limits. The time limits range from a 6 month completion time for valuations up to $50,000 and a 15 month time limit for valuations over $250,000. Penalties imposed range from $100 up to $1,000 per infraction (i.e., misdemeanor infraction). There is no Community Association in the City of San Marino. NEARBY CITIES The City of Rolling Hills Estates requires that projects commence within 6 months of approval. They do not have any prolonged projects but, the city could declare a prolonged project substandard and require it to be demolished or completed. This usually represents a lengthy process that may lead to litigation. Planning officials in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are in the process of formulating an amendment to the municipal code to enforce deadlines on projects. We will monitor this and provide updates as necessary. The City of Palos Verdes Estates applies a certain amount of working days to a particular project which may be extended by staff for six months for one time only. Further extensions may be established by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff. PROLONGED CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS PAGE 2 i lobo o heater r In D / J O .J SEP 2 4. 1997 CITY OF RO''—i ' ;tit1S By 12 September, 1997 City Council, City of Rolling Hills: Board of Directors. Rolling Hills Community :association Dear Friends: Please note an article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12th, 1997 regarding the action some local cities are taking about prolonged building projects. The Juge property next door to us, at 61 Eastfield Drive has been going on for ten long nears. This has presented us with a very ugly, unpleasant and a gravating situation. It certainly does not seem to be in keeping with the high standards of life in this lovely community. We sincerely hope that the Board of Directors will see fit to enact some sort of ordinance concerning a time limit for construction projects in this City. Perhaps you will want to communicate with the City Council of San Marino to find out how they are proceeding on this issue. Sincerely, 1 1CbWi S3 eastfield drive rolling hills ce 90274 home (1101311-2041 office (310] 544-1171 • ROLLING HILLS REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Offered by John and Doreen Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive From our point of view, it's not the same Rolling Hills we moved to in 1956! The condition that has affected our view for over ten years is the excessively prolonged house -building ordeal next door to us to the south. We have lived with the noise, the dust, the general disruption all this while. It has not been pleasant. This debaucle has certainly affected our property value. And others up and down Eastfteld Drive. Here is a brief list of the problems we have experienced: Violation of easement rights: Initial placement of a hurricane fence crossed over the easement entrance Plan included a planting in the middle of the easement entrance Now driveway down the easement has been elevated to the extent that an access pathway to our rear lower level is impossible to use,-- too steep. Wall built into our easement and property, necessitating our having a survey to prove the encroachment. Tractor work on Sundays Auto parking in the easement (his driveway) The first. and foremost problem - approval of such incompatible plans given the sixe of the building pad. Now, we believe there are solutions for our problems, and all others like them in the City. We refer you to the clipped article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12 regarding actions enacted by San Marino to correct just exactly these sorts of neighborhood control problems. Why cannot Rolling Hills control the building projects whithin the city? Each time we have complained about the excessive construction time we are advised the matter is out of the city's hands - the County governs. This certainly seems to be a "cop-out", sacrificing our authority to govern what occurs in our city to an outside bureaucracy. Is there a conclusion to this problem? Yes! Pass time limit laws on construction projects It is in the hands of our local elected officials. Sincerely, 0-(140.2€04,x, '84 FRIDAY. SEPTEMBER 12 1947 • . NEWS IN BRIEF A summary of developments across Los Angeles County Sal Marko Law Imposes Time Limit on Construction Projects The City Council, tired of con- struction projects that leave neigh- bors enduring noise, dust and un- sightly lots for years, has enacted a law that levies fines for failure to complete work within a designated time. The city 1s among the first in the San Gabriel Valley to impose a timetable for builders. Under the law, approved by the council late Wednesday, a property owner would have six months to complete a $50,000 project, nine months for $100,000 project and a year to finish. a $250,000 project. The fine for running over schedule would be double the cost of the initial build- ing ermit, offi al�bbi. E3ell said City Manager mounting complaints about a handful of projects around the city led officials to make the change. One house remodeling project has dragged on for three years, longer than any other residential project in the city. Residents say a number of sites in the city seem to be permanent homes for work crews, concrete mixers and dozens of trucks. Many cities require only that builders show work is continuing to get a new building permit every six months. Pasadena officials are consider- ing a similar law. Residents of the South San Rafael Avenue area in Pasadena have protested a massive make -over of a mansion that has lasted nearly seven years. But Pasadena building officials said an- other project in the San Rafael Hills has lasted two decades as one man has single-handedly remod- eled a home. TITLE OF RESOLUTION: TO REQUIRE "SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION" OF BUILDINGS INVOLVING "MAJOR CONSTRUCTION" WITHIN A DEFINED COMPLETION PERIOD, WITH SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION TO BE BONDED OR COVERED BY A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON LIQUIDATED DAMAGE PROVISION. UNPAID LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHALL BE ENFORCEABLE BY AN ASSOCIATION LIEN. Purpose: To avoid the considerable future adverse aesthetic and safety impact on the Community Association and its members caused by the failure to complete construction of buildings within a reasonable time period. Definitions: For the purpose of this Resolution the phrase "Substantial Completion" shall mean that all exterior construction, roofing, painting, glazing, and other finishing called for on the building's approved plans have been completed so it appears from the outside as completed, together with installation of all approved hardscape and landscaping, irrigation systems, and removal of temporary fencing, power, and sanitation. The "Substantial Completion Date" shall mean the date the project is Substantially Completed as defined herein. "Major Construction" shall be interpreted to mean any residential or ancillary new or remodel building project involving an estimated cost exceeding $250,000, which in the opinion of the Association, involves construction work visible by neighbors or from Association roadways or trails. Resolved That: It shall be the policy of the Association as to all Major Construction to require as part of the permitting process that the Owner and the Association mutually agree to a reasonable Substantial Completion Date for the proposed improvements to reach the stage of Substantial Completion and to establish either the time and amount of a completion bond to be purchased by applicant in a form and amount satisfactory to Association, or the monthly amount which reasonably equals the liquidated damages to the Association and the members caused by a failure to Substantially Complete the improvements by the Substantial Completion Date. Failure to Substantially Complete by 1 the Substantial Completion Date shall constitute a "Default" permitting Association to make claim against the completion bond or for the liquidated damages. The amount per month of liquidated damages shall be prorated on the basis of a 30 -day month for partial months and such amounts due the last day of each month and shall bear interest at 10% simple interest from the month -end of accrual until paid in full. Provided however, in the event of a Default, the Owner shall have an additional 45 - calendar day "Grace Period" within which to cause the improvements to be Substantially Completedand if the Owner achieves Substantial Completion within the Grace Period, the Association's rights and claims hereunder will be waived, but failure to achieve Substantial Completion within the Grace Period shall result in the Association's claims against the bonding company or for liquidated damages to be measured from the first date of Default. Upon written request and documentation supporting same filed by Owner, the Board in its sole discretion may grant one or more, but not to exceed 60 -day extensions, to the Substantial Completion Date due to unforeseen delays determined to be caused by Acts of God or other special unforeseeable circumstance, subject to such conditions as the Board may reasonably impose as a material part of such an extension. However, insufficient construction funds and/or failure of a contractor to perform its obligations shall generally not be considered a basis for extending the Substantial Completion Date. The Board may enforce its rights hereunder in the same manner as any other delinquent assessment against a Homeowner, including filing, and foreclosure upon, its lien for amounts due plus interest provided herein. LI I Y UI- SHN MHKINU ILL :6125-JUU-u(Uy ep ID:J1 No.UUJ r'.UL CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM AGENDA • ITEM TO MAYOR FILUTZE AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM DATE SUBJECT AVID A. SALDARA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT SEPTEMBER 10, 1997 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1I07.2ud Reading RE: MAXIMUM TIME LIMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS i BACKGROUND; On August 13, 1997, Council approved on first reading, Ordinance No. 097-1107. This pertains to the establishment of a maximum time limit for the completion of construction projects. According to the ordinance a property owner will be subject to the payment of penalty fees by the City if work is not completed within a specific period of time. The deadlines vary in relationship to the project's valuation. For example, a small project under $50,000 in valuation would be required to be completed within six (6) months. A larger project having a valuation greater than $250,000 would be required to be completed within fifteen (15) months. Additionally, a provision would authorize the Planning and Building Director discretion to grant an extension to the required completion date if the project has been delayed beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Violations would be -enforced and penalties imposed in the same manner as violations of the Tree Preservation Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on second reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 e: 1wp61bouncillmaztlme.sep • ' ' .'�t i; I'S • -•! �, �fi ' irk i.`i h'AriIND CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 17,97 15:30 No.003 P.01 TO FROM DATE SUBJECT CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR FILUTZE AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDA1IA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AGENDA 3 AUGUST 13, 1997 ITEM ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107. 1st Reading CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COMPLETION DEADLINES BACKGROUND: Last month, staff presented the City Council with a proposed ordinance that would place time limitations on commercial and residential construction projects. This proposal is a result of an increased number of resident complaints regarding the excessive period of time that some property owners take in completing a construction project. The main example is 770 Chaucer where this remodeling project has taken over 2 'i years and has not been completed. The residual noise, debris, traffic, and overall unattractiveness of building projects can only be tolerated within a reasonable time period by surrounding residents from a project. The City Council was in agreement with the concept of this ordinance following further amendments by the City Attorney. The amended ordinance is attached for your consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve and adopt on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 LIIY OF 5HN MHk1NU IEL:818-3cU-U7u9 Sep 17,97 15:22 No.002 P.02 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO AMENDING THE SAN MARINO CITY CODE REGARDING THE TIME WITHIN WHICH PROPERTY OWNERS MUST COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, Property owners sometimes take an excessively long period of time to complete a construction project; and WHEREAS, delayed completion of construction for unreasonably long periods of time subjects neighboring property owners to unnecessary adverse impacts from construction noises and unsightliness caused by dead landscaping and storage of construction materials, equipment, trash, and portable toilets; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to encourage development projects that improve the appearance of properties and maintain high property values, but wants to prevent unreasonably lengthy construction projects that negatively affect surrounding properties; and WHEREAS, establishing a reasonable completion date for construction projects is necessary to protect neighborhoods from the adverse impacts of lengthy projects. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: u'ectior 1. Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 of Article 01, Title of the San Marino City Code are renumbered as Sections 25.01.06 and 25.01.07, respectively, and new Sections 25.01.04 and 25.01.05 are added to Article 1 of Title XXV to read as follows: 25.01.04 COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION. Unless an extension is granted pursuant to Section 25.01.05, each person owning property for which a building permit has been issued pursuant to Article 2 of Title XXV of the San Marino City Code shall cause all work authorized by said permit to be completed within the time limits specified below from the date of issuance of the building permit; VALUATION PROJECT COMPLETION TIME Up to $50,000 $50,001 to $100,000 $100,001 to $250,000 $250,001 and over 6 months 9 months 12 months 15 months The valuation shall be the same valuation determined by the Building Official upon issuance of the building permit. CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL :818-300-0709 Sep 17,97 15:23 No .002 P.03 CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 PAGE TWO 25.01.05: EXTENSION OF COMPLETION DATES. The Director of Planning and Building may grant an extension of a completion date established pursuant to Section 25.01.04 if the Director finds that the project has been performed as expeditiously as reasonably possible and in a manner to reasonably accommodate the needs of persons residing in the neighborhood and that the delay in completion of construction was beyond the reasonable control of the property owner or contractor. Decisions of the Director on whether to grant an extension may be appealed to the Planning Commission and from the Planning Commission to the City Council. Applications for an extension must be submitted no earlier than two months prior to the expiration date and no later than one month prior to the expiration date. Section 2: Section 01.06.01 of Article 6 of Chapter I, of the San Marino City Code is amended to read as follows: 01.06.01: SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following sections of the San Marino City Code: a) 23.06.13; and b) 25.01.04. Section 3: The second paragraph of Section 01.06.13 of Chapter I of the San Marino City Code is amended to read as follows: If the violation is a continuing violation of Section 25.01.04 or of the building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 10th day of September, 1997. PAUL CROWLEY, VICE MAYO ATTEST: CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK LIIY UI- SHN MHKINU ILL:d1ti-JUU-U(Uy Sep 1(,y( 1 :14 NO.UUL f•'.U4 CITY OF SAN MARINO ORDINANCE NO. 097-1107 PAGE THREE I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 097-1107 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting of the City Council held on the 10th day of September, by the following vote: AYES COUNCILMEMBERS BROWN, COTTON, DRYDEN, AND VICE MAYOR CROWLEY. NOES NONE. ABSTAIN : MAYOR FILUTZE. ABSENT NONE. c 4 CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK r.\wp6NW. ordo971.107 L 1 Ir Ur 5HN MHK 1 NU I tL : b 125-JUU-U (Uy sep '1(. 3( 15:15 No.UU1 F.U2. TO FROM DATE SUBJECT CITY OF SAN MARINO MEMORANDUM MAYOR COTTON AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL DAVID A. SALDANA, DIRECTOR PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT JULY 9, 1997 ORDINANCE NO. 097-1101. FIRST READING J.IFESPAN OF BUILDING PERMITS BACKGROUND: This item has been continued from the meetings of April 9th, June 11th, and June 21st. The proposed ordinance pertains to amending Chapter 25- Uniform Codes and Fire Prevention of the City Code. The amendment would do the following: • Establish a required project completion date based upon project valuation and date of building permit issuance. • Establish a penalty fee for projects exceeding the required project completion date This ordinance has been originated because of the increased number of complaints received from irate neighbors of construction projects. They feel that they are unreasonably inconvenienced by property owners who take an unusual amount of time to complete construction projects. An example of such a project is at 770 Chaucer Road. This project has tAken 2 years and has not yet been completed. This project is an example where an owner has extended the project by calling for inspection right before the 180 -day expiration deadline on various phases of the project. A deterrent to lengthy projects, proposed by this ordinance, is a required project completion deadline. Staff proposes a deadline based upon building valuation. A small project should be completed sooner than a large project. Although a large project should be given more time than a small one, the City should require its completion not to exceed say fifteen months. Council should take the liberty to suggest more or less time based on what seems reasonable. As suggested by Councilmember Filutze, kitchen remodels and other similar projects should not be subject to these restrictions. As such, staff has amended the ordinance by exempting all such interior projects. Finally, a penalty fee should be imposed if an owner exceeds the required project completion deadline. Proposed is to require fees to be paid in accordance with the civil enforcement procedures in Article 6 of Chapter 1 established last year with the tree preservation ordinance. This ordinance will not be effective unless the public is properly made aware of its existence. Staff intends to work closely with the San Marino Tribune to distribute information regarding this subject. Also, a 1 CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 17,97 15:26 No .002 P.06 counter sign will be prepared and displayed. Staff is also working on a handout to accompany the issuance of all building permits that will not only cover this issue but also outline allowed construction hours. These would be in addition to the Guidelines for the Maintenance of Construction Sites. Additionally, staff will send notices warning owners before their permits expire. RECOMMENDATION1 Staff recommends that the City Council approve on first reading Ordinance No. 097-1107. Attachment: Ordinance No. 097-1107 c:\wp6I \council\tat dgcc. jul 2 �o rc�i ru xa "To e.1de.I.Cnwr.c.Q. NAtuat la kfkR1 CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 22,97 14:53 No.002 P.01 C O V E R S H E E T FAX To: City of Rolling Hills - ATTN: Lola Unger Fax #: (310) 377-7288 Subject: City of San Marino Ordinance No. 097-1107 - Penalties For Violations Date: September 22, 1997 Pages: 10, including this cover sheet. COMMENTS: Lola: Please find attached a copy of City of San Marino Ordinance No. 096-1088 which establishes the administrative procedures and penalties for violations of the City Code, and which the City references in Ordinance No. 097-1107 pertaining to the time within which property owners must complete construction. Section 2 of Ordinance No. 097-1107 concerning Section 01.06.01 of Article 6 of Chapter 1 of the San Marino City Code also refers to violations of sections 23.06.13 and 25.01.04. You will also find copies of these sections of the City Code attached for your information. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me. From the desk of... CAROL A. ROBE, CMC/AAE City Cierk City of San Marino 2200 Huntington Drive San Marino, CA 91108 (628)300-0706 Fax: (626) 300-0709 CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 11.yr 14:56 NO.UUL F'.UL AS ORDINANCE NO. 096-1088 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF SAN MARINO AND AMENDING THE CODE SAN MARINO PROCEDURES AND THE CITY CODE OF SAN MARINO CITY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARINO DOES FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Article 06 of Chapter I of the City San Marino is added to read as follows: 01.06.01 SCOPE: This Article shall apply to violations of the following section of the San Marino City Code: 23.06.13. ORDAIN Code of 01.06.02 DEFINITIONS: The following words and phrases, when used in the context of this Article, shall have the following meanings: A. ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: Any person authorized to enforce the provisions of the San Marino City Code. B. LEGAL INTEREST: Any interest that is represented by a deed of trust, quitclaim deed, mortgage, judgment lien, tax or assessment lien, mechanic's lien or other similarinstrument, which is recorded with the County Recorder. i . •1♦ C. RESPONSIBLE PERSON: Any person who an Enforcement Official determines is responsible for causing or maintaining a public nuisance or a violation of the City Code or applicable state codes. The term "Responsible Person" includes but is not limited to a property owner, tenant, person with a Legal Interest in real property or person in possession of real property. 01.06.03 AUTHORITY: Any person violating any section of this Code that .is subject to this Article may be issued an administrative citation by an Enforcement Official as provided in this Article. 01.06.04 PENALTIES: An administrative penalty shall be assessed by means of an administrative citation issued by the Enforcement Official, and shall be payable directly to the City Treasurer. Penalties shall be collected in accordance with the procedures specified in this Article. 01.06.05 CONTINUING VIOLATIONS: It shall constitute a new and separate offense for each and every day, or portion thereof, during which a violation of, or failure to comply with, any provision or requirement of this Code is committed, continued, or permitted by any person. The time period for computing the number of days a violation has continued for 960131 57130.00001 tpp 1330849 0 CITY OF SRN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 22,97 14:54 No.002 F.u3 purposes of this Section shall commence on and shall include the date of service of the Administrative order, the date the Administrative Order otherwise provides, or for continuing violations of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning codes, 30 days following receipt of service of the Administrative Order, whichever date is applicable pursuant to Section 01.06.14. 01.06.06 PROCEDURES FOR ISSUING ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS: Upon discovering a violation of any section of this Code that is subject to this Article, an Enforcement Official may issue an administrative citation, on a form approved by the City Manager, to a Responsible Person, as follows: A. If the Responsible Person is a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate any one of the following individuals and issue to that individual an administrative citation: the president or other head of the corporation, a vice-president, a secretary or assistant secretary, a treasurer or assistant treasurer, a general manager, or a person authorized by the corporation to receive service of process in a civil action. If the office address of any of the above -listed individuals is known to the City, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to one of those individuals by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requGested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. B. If the Responsible Person is a business other than a corporation, the Enforcement Official shall attempt to locate the business owner and issue the business owner an administrative citation. If the Enforcement Official can locate only the manager of the business, the administrative citation may be given to the manager of the business. If the address of the business is known, a copy of the administrative citation also shall be mailed to the business owner or Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. C. The Enforcement Official shall attempt to obtain on the administrative citation the signature of the Responsible Person, or in cases in which the Responsible Person is a corporation or business, the signature of the person served with the administrative citation. If the Responsible Person or person served refuses or fails to sign the administrative citation, the failure or refusal to sign shall not affect the validity of the citation or of subsequent proceedings. 960131 57130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 2 . .1 CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 22,97 14:56 No.002 P.04 D. If the Enforcement Official is unable to locate the Responsible Person for the violation, the administrative citation shall be mailed to the Responsible Person by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. Simultaneously, the same notice may be sent by regular mail. If a notice sent by certified mail is returned unsigned, then service shall be deemed effective pursuant to regular mail, provided the notice that was sent by regular mail is not returned. E. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, or by certified mail or regular mail, the Enforcement Official shall post the administrative citation on any real property within the city in which the City has knowledge that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest, and such posting shall be deemed effective service. F. If the Enforcement Official does not succeed in serving the Responsible Party personally, by certified mail or regular mail, and the City is not aware that the Responsible Party has a Legal Interest in any real property within the City, the Enforcement Official shall cause the administrative citation to be published in a newspaper likely to give actual notice to the Responsible Party. The publication shall be once a week for four successive weeks in a newspaper published at least once a week. G. The Enforcement Official shall sign the administrative citation. 01.06.07 CONTENT OF wDMINISTRATIV3 CITATIONS; Administrative citations shall contain all of the following information: A. The date and location of the violation and the approximate time the violation was observed. B. The City Code section violated and a description of how the section was violated. C. The action required to correct the violation. D. The consequences of failing to correct the violation. E. The amount of penalty imposed for the violation. F. The date, time, and place of the administrative hearing on the violation and the consequences for failing to attend the hearing. G. The signature of the Enforcement Official, and the signature of the Responsible Person if that person can be located and will sign the citation, as set forth in Section 01.06.06. 960131 67130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 3 CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 22,97 14:56 No.002 P.05 Treasurer. 01.06.08 PENALTIES ASSESSED: A. If a violation of the City Code or applicable state code section was defined as an infraction by the City Code before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation, the penalty assessed shall not exceed: 1. $100 for the first violation. 2. $200 for the second violation of the same City Code or applicable state code section within one year. 3. $500 for each additional violation of the same City Code or applicable state code section within one year. B. If a violation of the City Code or applicable state code section was punishable as a misdemeanor before the adoption of this Article, then for each such violation the penalty assessed shall not exceed $1,000. C. The penalty assessed for violations of ordinances that are adopted after this Article is adopted, and that are subject to this Article, shall not exceed $1,000. D. All penalties assessed shall be payable to the City E. Payment of a penalty shall not excuse the failure to correct the violation nor shall it bar further enforcement action by the City. 01.06.09 TIME FOR ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING: The City shall conduct an administrative hearing at the d:,te_, time, and place indicated on the administrative citation. The hearing shall occur no earlier than fifteen (15) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person and no later than ninety (90) days after service of the citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.10 APPOINTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER: The appropriate Department Director shall appoint an Administrative Hearing Officer. The Department Director may appoint as the Administrative Hearing Officer any member of that Department's staff, but shall neither appoint any Enforcement Official nor any subordinate of any Enforcement Official. 01.06.11 REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE OF HEARING: The Responsible Person may request one continuance of the hearing, but in no event may the hearing begin later than ninety (90) days after service of the administrative citation upon the Responsible Person. 01.06.12 PROCEDURES AT ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING; Administrative hearings are informal, and formal rules of evidence and discovery do not apply. Each party shall have the opportunity to present evidence in support of his or her case and 960131 57130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 4 - CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 22,97 14:58 No.002 P.06 to cross-examine witnesses. The City bears the burden of proof at an administrative hearing to establish a violation of the City Code. The Administrative Hearing Officer must use preponderance of evidence as the standard of evidence in deciding the issues. 01.06.13 FAILURE TO ATTEND ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING: If the Responsible Person fails to attend the scheduled hearing, the hearing will proceed without the Responsible Person, and he or she will be deemed to have waived his or her right to an administrative hearing. Notwithstanding this waiver and the time limits set forth in Section 01.06.09, if service of the administrative citation is made by posting the citation on real property within the City in which the Responsible Person has a Legal Interest, and the Responsible Person provides verifiable and substantial evidence that removal of the citation from the property by a third party caused the Responsible Person's failure to attend the scheduled hearing, the Responsible Person shall be entitled to an administrative hearing. 01.06.14 DECISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER: The administrative hearing officer shall issue a written decision entitled "Administrative Order" no later than fifteen (15) days after the date on which the administrative hearing concludes. The Administrative Order shall be served upon the Responsible Person by any one of the methods set forth in Section 01.06.06 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall become final on the date of service, and shall notify the Responsible Person of his right to appeal as provided in Section 01.06.15 of this Article. The Administrative Order shall also set a deadline for compliance with its terms in the event that the Responsible Person fails to file an appeal. If the violation is a continuing violation of the City's building, plumbing, electrical, or zoning code, the Administrative Order shall provide that the Responsible Person has 30 days from receipt of the Administrative Order to correct the violation, and that if the violation is corrected within that time, no penalty will be imposed. 01.06.15 APPEAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: Within 20 days after service of the Administrative Order upon the Responsible Person, he or she may seek review of the Administrative Order by filing a notice of appeal with the municipal court. The Responsible Person shall serve upon the City Clerk either in person or by first class mail a copy of the notice of appeal. If the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal, the Administrative Order shall be deemed confirmed. 01.06.16 FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER: Failure to comply with a final Administrative Order is a misdemeanor. If the municipal court rules in favor of the City or if the Responsible Person fails to timely file a notice of appeal in the municipal court, and the Responsible Person then 960131 27130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 - 5 CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 22,97 1.4:59 No.002 P.07 fails to comply with the Administrative Order, the City may file a criminal misdemeanor action against the Responsible Person. Filing a criminal misdemeanor action does not preclude the City from using any other legal remedy available to gain compliance with the Administrative Order. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 13th day of March, 1996. 2 ARD E. LeSAGE, Attest: Q0.1.4t •1 CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK Approved As To Form: STEVEN L. DORSEY, ITY ATTORNEY I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing_ Ordinance No. 096-1088 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of San Marino at a Regular Meeting thereof, held on the 13th day of March, 1996, by the following vote of the Council: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS CROWLEY, DRYDEN, FILUTZE, VICE MAYOR COTTON, AND MAYOR LESAGE. NOES: NONE. ABSENT: NONE. c:\wp51\ord\civilpen.feb \ord0961.088 960131 57130-00001 tpp 1330849 0 CAROL A. ROBB, CMC/AAE CITY CLERK - 6 - CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 22,97 14:59 No.002 P.06 • include, for the purposes of this Section only, any building under actual construction at such date; provided, that such building is completed within one year from such date. (1954 Code §23.27) 23.06.11: REPAIR, RELOCATION OR ALTERATION OF DAMAGED BUILDINGS: No building which has been damaged or partially destroyed to the extent of more than 50 percent of its replacement value shall be repaired, moved or altered except in conformity with the provisions of this Chapter pertaining to buildings thereafter erected. This Section shall not apply to existing legal non -conforming residential or accessory buildings damaged by fire or earthquake, which may be rebuilt on prior foundations and/or footprints to the preexisting size, configuration and style. (1954 Code §23.28) 23.06.12: MINIMUM LOT AREA AND WIDTH REQUIREMENTS WILL NOT PREVENT USE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING: The requirements of this Chapter as to minimum lot area and lot width shall not be construed to prevent the construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling on any lot if such lot, prior to July 8, 1994, or the effective date of any amendment thereto making such lot non -conforming, was: A. Shown separately upon an official subdivision map; or B. Shown by a separate number or letter on a record of survey map filed with the County Recorder of Los Angeles County; or C. Deeded by a deed of record; or D. Subject to a contract of sale. Such construction or expansion of a single-family dwelling shall comply with all the applicable development standards of this Chapter in effect at the time of the construction or expansion. (Ord. 094-1056, 6-8-94) 23.06.13: CONSISTENCY WITH HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN: Zone change, conditional use permit, variance and other land use decisions shall be consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan (approved November 30, 1989) relating to Citing and Citing Criteria for hazardous waste facilities. Nothing herein shall limit the ability of the City to attach appropriate conditions to the issuance of any such approval in order to protect the public health, safety or welfare nor to establish more stringent planning requirements or citing criteria than those specified in the County Plan. (Ord. 980, 7-11-90) 23.06.14: PROHIBITION AGAINST INCLUDING PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CERTAIN EASEMENTS FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING SETBACKS, LOT COVERAGE AND SIMILAR REQUIREMENTS: No portion of a parcel burdened by an easement, other than an easement for utility purposes, which effectively precludes use of City of San Marino CITY OF SAN MARINO TEL:818-300-0709 Sep 22,97 15:01 No.002 F.09 25.01.04 25.01.05 25.01.04: PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS: Any person who violates or causes or permits any person to violate Section 25.01.01 of this Article shall be required, at the time of obtaining the permits required by this Chapter, to pay a penalty equal to one hundred percent (100%) of the total amount of all permit fees assessed for the construction work or activity pursuant to this Chapter in addition to the amount of the permit fees. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.05: PROPERTY OWNER RESPONSIBLE: The property owner or occupant of any property at which a violation of this Chapter shall occur shall be responsible for and liable for charges provided for in Section 25.01.04 of this Article. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) City of San Marino CITY OF SRN MARINO TEL :818-300-0709 Sep 22,9? 15:01 No .002 P.10 25.01.01 25.01.02 SECTION: 25.01.01: 25.01.02: 25.01.03: 25.01.04: 25.01.05: ARTICLE 01 GENERAL PROVISIONS Permits Required Times Construction Prohibited Work by Owner Permitted Penalty for Violations Property Owner Responsible ----� 25.01.01: PERMITS REQUIRED: It shall be unlawful for any person to begin or perform any construction work or construction activity or to cause or permit any construction work or construction activity, for which a permit is required by thls Chapter, to begin or perform on any residential or commercial parcel of property without having first obtained said permit. (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) 25.01.02: TIMES CONSTRUCTION PROHIBITED: It shall be unlawful for cny person to perform ,or to oa: se or permit to Le performed any construction work or construction activity for which a permit Is required by this Chapter or for any person requiring a business license pursuant to Chapter XI of this City Code to perform or to cause or permit to be performed any construction work or construction activity on the following days: (Ord. 092-1015, 6-10-92) A. On Mondays through Fridays, before seven o'clock (7:00) A.M. and after six o'clock (6:00) P.M.; except, that the Director of Planning and Building may authorize, in. connection with seismic upgrading or fire sprinkler installation, construction work or activity in the C-1 Zone to be performed outside between six o'clock (6:00) P.M. and nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. and inside an enclosed building after nine o'clock (9:00) P.M. Such construction work or activity shall be, performed in compliance with any conditions the Director of Planning and Building shall impose to alleviate potential disturbance to surrounding properties. City of San Marino City 0/ lea lliny INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 B. ALLEN LAY Mayor FRANK E. HILL Mayor Pro Tem THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Councilmember JODY MURDOCK Councilmember GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S.' Councilmember September 23, 1997 Mr. and Mrs. John Heater 59 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Heater: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 Thank you for taking the time to attend the September 22nd Rolling Hills City Council meeting. We appreciate you presenting your concerns at this public. meeting. - We will be working with our City Attorney's office to prepare a report regarding the completion of building projects. It is anticipated that we will have this report prepared for the City Council meeting on Monday, October 27, 1997. This meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. We understand that you will be out of town for the meeting on October 13th. We will provide you copies of the staff report that is prepared before the October 27th meeting. Should you have any questions in the interim, please do not hesitate to call. Again, thank you for attending the City Council meeting. Sincerely, 54zif/Oo Craig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk heater.ltr cc: City Council City Attorney ®Printed on Recycled Paper. i nh john n heater S E P 2.1997 CITY OF By 12 September, 1997 City Council, City of Rolling Hills: Board of Directors, Rolling Hills Community Association Dear Friends: Please note an article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12th. 1997 regarding the action some local cities are taking about prolonged building projects. The Juge property next door to us, at 61 Eastfield Drive has been going on for ten long nears. This has presented us with a very ugly, unpleasant and aggravating situation. It certainly does not seem to be in keeping with the high standards of life in this lovely community. We sincerely hope that the Board of Directors will see fit to enact some sort of ordinance concerning a time limit for construction projects in this City. Perhaps you will want to communicate with the City Council of San Marino to find out how they are proceeding on this issue. Sincerely, • S9 easI(iel0 Olive rolling hills ca 90274 home (310) 377-2041 office (310] 544-1178 • B4 FRIDAY. SEPTEMBER 12. 1949 * NEWS IN BRIE • A summary of developments across Los Angeles County Sao Martho_ Law Imposes Time Limit on Construction -Projects The City Council,. tired of con- struction projects that leave neigh- • bors'enduring noise, dust and' un- sightly lots for years, has enacted a law that levies fines for failure to complete work within a designated time. The city is among the first in the San Gabriel Valley. to impose a timetable for. builders. Under the law, approved by the council late Wednesday, a property owner would have six months to complete a $50,000 project, nine months for $100,000 project and a year to finish. a $250,000 project. The fine for running over schedule would be double the cost of the initial build- ing permit, officials said. City Manager Debbie Bell said • mounting complaints about a handful of projects around the city led officials to make the change. One house remodeling project has dragged on for three years, longer than any other residential project in the city. Residents say a number of sites in the city seem to be permanent homes.'for work crews, concrete mixers and dozens of trucks. Many cities require only that builders show work is continuing to get a new building permit every six months. . Pasadena officials are consider- ing a similar law. Residents of the South San Rafael Avenue area in Pasadena have protested a massive make -over of a mansion that has lasted nearly seven years. But Pasadena building officials said an- other project in the San Rafael Hills has lasted two decades as one man has single-handedly remod- eled a home. -1 Ioh 0110 0 hearer 22 September. 1997 City Council City of Rolling Ilills Dear Friends: .A recent short article in the Los Angeles TimeS has prompted us to bring to your attention actions taken by another city in the County regarding the general public nuisance of out -of -control building projects. We believe Rolling [ [ills is long overdue in this regard. The attached list of complaints concerns the building project just south of our residence that has been in progress for over ten years. ft was May of 1988 that the hadau house was bulldozed. and evork started which is still in progress and far from complete. We submit the attached for your consideration and hopefully, your timely action. Sincerely, (92em, 59 east[ield drive rolling hills ca 90274 home [310] 377-2041 office [310] 544-1170 ROLLING HILLS REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Offered by John and Doreen Heater, 59 Eastfield Drive From our point of view, it's not the same Rolling Hills we moved to in 1956! The condition that has affected our view for over ten years is the excessively prolonged house -building ordeal next door to us to the south. We have lived with the noise, the dust, the general disruption all this while. It has not been pleasant. This debaucle has certainly affected our property value. And others up and down Eastfield Drive. Here is a brief list of the problems we have experienced: Violation of easement rights: Initial placement of a hurricane fence crossed over the easement entrance Plan included a planting in the middle of the easement entrance Now driveway down the easement has been elevated to the extent that an access pathway to our rear lower level is impossible to use,-- too steep. Wall built into our easement and property, necessitating our having a survey to prove the encroachment. Tractor work on Sundays Auto parking in the easement (his driveway) The first, and foremost problem - approval of such incompatible plans given the sixe of the building pad. Now, we believe there are solutions for our problems, and all others like them in the City. We refer you to the clipped article from the Los Angeles Times of September 12 regarding actions enacted by San Marino to correct just exactly these sorts of neighborhood control problems. Why cannot Rolling Hills control the building projects whithin the city? Each time we have complained about the excessive construction time we are advised the matter is out of the city's hands - the County governs. This certainly seems to be a "cop-out", sacrificing our authority to govern what occurs in our city to an outside bureaucracy. Is there a conclusion to this problem? Yes! Pass time limit laws on construction projects It is in the hands of our local elected officials. Sincerely, j es?, 1.9 S4 FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12. 1997 * NEWS IN BRIEF A summary of developments across Los Angeles County Sav Marit4 Law Imposes Time Limit on Construction Projects The City Council, tired of con- struction projects that leave neigh- borsenduring noise, dust and un- sightly lots for years, has enacted a law that levies fines for failure to complete work within a designated time. The city is among the first in the San Gabriel. Valley to impose a timetable for. builders. Under the law, approved by the council late Wednesday, a property owner would have six months to complete a $50,000 project, nine months for $100,000 project and a year to finish. a $250,000 project. The fine for running over schedule would be double the cost of the initial build- ing permit, officials said. City Manager Debbie Bell said mounting complaints about a handful of projects around the city led officials to make the change. One house remodeling project has dragged on for three years, longer than any other residential project in the city. • Residents say a number of sites in the city seem to be permanent homes 'for work crews, concrete mixers and dozens of trucks. Many cities require only that builders show work is continuing to get a new building permit every six months. Pasadena officials are consider- ing a similar law. Residents of the South San Rafael Avenue area in Pasadena have protested a massive make -over of a mansion that has lasted nearly seven years. But Pasadena building officials said an- other project in the San Rafael Hills has lasted two decades as one man has single-handedly remod- eled a home. Cu, o/eo!l,�,.S Jiff, INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 . (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 mail: cityoft@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 3.B. Mtg. Date: 8/6/97 DATE: AUGUST 6, 1997 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL HONORABLE PRESIDENT AND RHCA BOARD OF DIRECTORS ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING ABANDONED PROJECTS BACKGROUND While most construction projects proceed at an orderly pace, sometimes a project may stop because of the lack of financing by the developer. The City and the County are not usually notified of these financial situations or when work stops on a project. The building inspector does not inspect projects unless called by the contractor at certain points of construction (i.e. when rough grading is completed, when final grading is completed, when foundations are being prepared for concrete pouring, when electrical is complete, etc.). The building inspector usually informs the contractor about the next call for required inspection to be made (electrical, plumbing, etc.). Abandoned projects are brought to the attention of the City and County when City or County staff notices that there does not appear to be any progress or when neighbors or residents notify the City. EXPIRATION OF PERMITS The County Building Code, which the City has adopted, states that permits become null and void after one year if work has not commenced or once the permit is issued if the building or work authorized is suspended or abandoned for one year or more at any time after the work has commenced for a period of 180 days (6 months). Minor construction and a call for inspection is considered "making progress." If no calls for inspection are made for over a year, the permits are expired. For the work to commence or recommence on the same project, new fees are required with a 25% surcharge of the required fees. Printed on Recycled Paper. SUBSTANDARD BUILDING The County will expire a permit after 5 years if the work is not completed unless the permit holder can show that work is being done (i.e. calling for inspections and minor construction monthly at the site). Any unfinished building that has been in the course of construction an unreasonable time (not less than 5 years), and where the appearance and other conditions of the structure are such that the unfinished structure substantially detracts from the appearance of the immediate neighborhood or reduces the value of property in the immediate neighborhood, or is otherwise a nuisance can be declared substandard. The goal of the permit process is not to impede progress but to better building construction and provide greater safety to the public by uniformity in building laws and to see the completion of the project. City staff works closely with property owners that are having difficulty completing a project. In several cases, we coordinated meetings between area property owners and required the builder to supply a construction schedule. At a minimum, we require incomplete projects to be fenced so that they do not become an attractive nuisance. It is our goal to encourage that projects be completed in a timely fashion and to do our best to address specific concerns expressed by neighbors of an incomplete project.