Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 PUBLIC NUISANCE 06-15-98DATE: JUNE 15, 1998 Inter-Com NO. 1 6-15-98 TO: FROM' SUBJECT: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPEAL OF PUBLIC NUISANCE DETERMINATION AT 13151 RANCHWOOD AND ASSESSMENT OF COSTS SUMMARY: On April 6, 1998, the Community Development Department determhted that the property at 13151 Ranchwood Road constituted a public nuisance. Upon appeal, the Planning Commission upheld the Community Development Department's determination and directed abatement of the public nuisance conditions and assessment of administrative costs to the property owner. The property owner has appealed the Planning Commission decision to the City Council. The City Council will consider the $3,707.17 itt abatetnent and administrative costs incurred by the City for this public nuisance and may place a special assesstnent against the propertyfor repayment of the costs. Appellant: Marcella NaP olitan. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council' , . Conduct a public hearing on the appeal of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3592 and on the Assessment of Costs against the property ownedproperty. Adopt Resolution No. 98-53 upholding the Planning Commission's action denying the appellant's appeal of the public nuisance determination at 13151 Ranchwood Road. 3. Assess enforcement/abatement costs to the property owner. FISCAL IMPACT This appeal is an appellant initiated action. The City has incurred enforcement costs of $3,707. The City has the ability to recover these costs by either billing the property owner and/or assessing a lien against the property. City Council Report Appeal Planning Commi~.,,on Resolution 3592 June 15, 1998 Page 2 BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION Site and Surrounding Properties The property located at 13151 Ranchwood Road is developed with a single family home. The home is within the Bellewick-Ranchwood Homeowner's Association, a single-family neighborhood developed in the late 1960s. History The Community Development Department has received complaints regarding the condition of the front and rear yards at 13151 Ranchwood Road since 1987. Over the past 11 years, the City of Tustin has sent Notices of Violation to Ms. Marcella Napolitan, the owner, on 18 separate occasions requesting the removal of overgrown weeds (TCC 5502(m)(1). On September 18, 1989 the City Council declared the property a Public Nuisance and ordered the owner to: . Remove overgrown vegetation in front, side and rear yards; . Remove dead landscaping, weeds and fallen fruit in front, side and rear yards and dispose of properly; , Maintain lawn areas visible from any public way such that lawns are free of weeds, dead vegetation and debris, trees and shrubs are trimmed so they do not impede pedestrian traffic along the walkway, trees shall be pruned so they do not intrude into the neighboring property, etc; and, . Maintain the property in a nuisance free condition. Inspections and Subsequent Actions The following provides a chronological summary of the inspections and subsequent actions that have occurred this year. March 9, 1998 The Community Development Department received a complaint regarding nuisance conditions at 13151 Ranchwood Road. Staff inspected the property and found the front yard to be in violation of Tustin City Code section 5502(m)(1) Landscape maintenance and section 5502(b) Public Nuisance (Attachments A an B). March 10, 1998 Staff was granted access into the backyard of a neighboring adjoining property to inspect the rear yard of 13151 Ranchwood. The City Council Report Appeal Planning Commis~,,~n Resolution 3592 June 15, 1998 Page 3 March 12, 1998 March 17, 1998 April 1, 1998 April 2, 1998 April 6, 1998 April 6, 1998 April 13,'1998 May 8, 1998 May 26, 1998 May 26, 1998 June 1, 1998 vegetation was overgrown in the rear such that staff was unable to determine the overall condition of the backyard (Attachment B). A Notice of Violation was sent to Ms.'Napolitan requesting that the nuiSance conditions be abated by March 22, 1998, or the City would obtain an inspection warrant to determine the extent of the violations on the property and proceed with nuisance abatement. Staff met with the property owner, Marcella Napolitan. Ms. Napolitan was handed a copy of the Notice of Violation, which was Sent on March 12, 1998. Staff requested consent to inspect the rear yard on the property, however, Ms. Napolitan refused, and indicated that she would not comply with the Notice of Violation. The City Attomey obtained an inspection warrant from the Municipal Court of Orange County to permit inspection of the exterior of the subject property. Staff posted the property with a notice and a copy of the inspection warrant stating that an inspection would be conducted on April 6, 1998 at 10:00 a.m. City staff inspected the property and determined that the front, sides and backyard of this property were in violation of Tustin City Code section 5502(m)(1) Landscape Maintenance and section 5502(b) Public Nuisance. A Notice and Order of Public Nuisance was mailed to Ms. Napolitan requesting clean-up of the property within (10) ten days of the receipt of the letter. The notice also explained Ms. Napolitan's appeal right as provided by city ordinance. Ms. Napolitan filed an appeal of the Notice' and Order of Public Nuisance (Attachment C) Staff videotaped property from the public right-of-way. Staff photographed property from the public right-of-way to show the Planning Commission the current condition of the property. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3592 denying the appeal of the public nuisance determination (Attachment D). Ms. Napolitan filed an appeal of Planning Commission Resolution 3592. (Attachment E) City Council Report Appeal Planning Commission Resolution 3592 June 15, 1998 Page 4 June 1, 1998 Staff met with contractors on the property to obtain bids for removing overgrown vegetation and restricting growth of weeds and vegetation. At that time no work had commenced on the property. June 2, 1998 Staff spoke with Tom's Tree trimming employees who were at the property and in the process of removing vegetation from the rear yard and grinding stumps in the front yard. Staff photographed work in progress. Planninq Commission Action At their May 26, 1998 meeting, the Planning Commission received testimony from the appellant and neighbors and adopted Resolution No. 3592 denying the appeal of the Enforcement Officer's public nuisance determination at 13151 Ranchwood Road. The Commission also directed staff to abate the public nuisance conditions in the front and rear yards and bill all costs of this enforcement action and abatement process to the property owner. Costs Incurred by the City of Tustin City costs associated with the initial investigation time and costs of the public nuisance are $3,026.69. Additional costs in the amount of $597.32 have been incurred as part of the Planning Commission appeal and City Council report and hearing. Total abatement/administrative costs are $3707.17. The details of these costs are identified on Attachment F. The following provides an abbreviated summary of the tasks associated with this enforcement/abatement action: · Seven (7) site inspections by code enforcement staff. · City Attorney costs for warrant preparation, filing and consultation with staff. · April 6th inspection which included Field Service, Police Department and Code Enforcement staff. · Administration costs for preparation of Planning Commission and City Council appeal report. Assessment Hearing Section 5508 of the Tustin City Code provides that the City Council may hold an assessment hearing to authorize the placement of a lien on the property for the purpose of recovering costs incurred by the City of Tustin for abating a Public Nuisance. Tonight's City Council meeting was noticed as both an Appeal and an Assessment of Costs hearing. Staff recommends that the City Council authorize a lien be placed on the subject property City Council Report Appeal Planning Commiss,on Resolution 3592 June 15, 1998 Page 5 if the property owner fails to pay the enforcement costs within 30 days of the City invoicing the owner. Current Status of the Property Subsequent to the May 26, 1998 Planning Commission hearing, on June 2, 1998 the property owner hired "Tom's Tree Removal Service" to remove the overgrown vegetation, weeds and stumps from the entire property. As of the date of this report the tree stumps and roots in the front yard have been removed. Although a portion of the rear yard has been cleared, overgrown vegetation still remains along the north side yard. There has been no evidence to date of landscape renovation in the front yard. Ms. Napolitan has stated in her appeal letter that arrangements are being made to install sprinklers and plant grass in the front yard. Due to the history of property maintenance problems on this property, staff is recommending that the City of Tustin should be prepared to have a contractor finish the planting and irrigation on this property if Ms. Napolitan does not complete the replanting within 30 days. Costs for the planting and irrigation are unknown at this time. Bids will be obtained prior to the City directing the work to be completed. Georg~ Wiesinger / Code Enforcement Officer Director, Community Development GW~ccrepo rts\l 3151 ran chwood.doc Attachments: A.- Tustin City Code 5502(m)(1) and 5502(b) B. - Video and photographs of Location C. - Letter of Appeal D.- Planning Commission Resolution No. 3592 E. - Letter of Appeal of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3592 F. - Summary of Costs G.- City Council Resolution No. 98-53 TUST .IN CITY CODE PROPERTY lVL, I~.NTENANCE, ETc. 5501 "Wrecked" means that which has an ontward manifestation or appearance of damage to parts and contents which is essential to oper~ftion. (Ord. No. 1080, Sec. 2, 11-18-91) 5502 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE NUISANCES It is hereby declared to be a public nuisance for any property owner or other person in control of said property to keep or maintain said property, including adjacent parkways, · sidewalks or streets under fee ownership by said person, in such manner that any of the followi~j conditions are found to exist: (a) Any abandoned, dismantled, wrecked, inoperable, discarded objects or equipment such as, but not limited to automobiles, trucks, trailers, boats, appliances,' water heaters, refrigerators, furniture, f~xtures, miscellaneous machinery and equipments, cans or containers standing or st~red on property or on adjacent parkway sidewalks or streets which can be viewed from a public highway, walkway, or from private or public prope.-~y, or which items are readily accessible from such places, or which are stored on private property in violation of any other law or ordinance; .~~ (b) Any condition which exists upon any premises that is dangerous to human life or detrimental to health as determined by an appropriate city official; (c) Any alteration of land, the topography or cor~figuration of which in any man-made state, whether as a result of grading operations, excavations, fill or other alteration, interferes with the established drainage pattern over the property or from adjoining or other property which does or may result in erosion, subsidence or surface water drainage problems of such magnitude as to be injurious.to p.ublic health, safety and welfare of any rhal property; (d) Disposal or presence of oil, grease, other petroleum products, noxious chemicals, pesticides, or any gaseous, liquid or solid waste in such a manner [as] to consist [constitute] a health or fire hazard er degrade the appearance of or detract from the aesthetic and property, values of neighboring properties; (e) Lumber (excluding stacked firewood not visible from a public street, alley or adjoining property for use on the property or lumber for a construction project on the property with a valid permit), junk, trash, salvage materials (including but not limited to auto parts, scrap metals, tires, tin cans and bottles), or packing boxes or other debris stdred on premises in excess of seventy-two (72) hours; (f) An)' performance of work on motor Vehicles, vehicle engines or parts, or household f'm-tures, on a public right-of-way or performance of such work in' yard areas of resi- dential properties so .as to be visible from a public right-of-way or neighboring prop- erties other than emergency repairs or minor maintenance being performed by the owner of the vehicle or t'Lxture; (g) Any sWimming pool, pond, spa or other body ~f water or excavation which is aban- doned, unattended, or unfiltered; REV: 1.92 PS-5-5 ATTACHMENT A TUSTIN CITY CODE 5502(h) · I~ROPERTY MAINTENANCE, ETC. (h) Trailers not ~ithin established mobilehome parks, dumpsters or similar vehicles or equipment used for sleeping purposes; (i) Accumulations of asphalt, concrete.: plaster, tile, rocks, bricks, building materials and fill dirt resulting from exmvations on or-off the property; (j)Use of a parked or stored Vehicle, boat, camper shell, trailer or other similar item as temporary or perrnanen.t., living space; (lc) Any vehicle, boat, cam, per shell or other similar item parked or stored on an unpaved surface or which blocks access to a required parking.space; (1) Presence ofgra~ti, t~at is, City unauthorized inscribing, spraying of paint, or making of symbols using paint ~pray paint, ink, chalk, dye, or similar materials on public or private structure, buildings, or places. . - Property. f~{Ung to meet minimum levels of maintenance and care as set forth as (1) Landscaping. All landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy condition free dead~ decayed, overgrown or discarded plant material; (2) Landscape irrigation. Landscape irrigation pipes and sprinkler heads shall be · maintained in good work6ng order so as to cover all landscaped areas; (3) Wails, fences and other structures. All walls, fences and trash enclosures and other stru~es shall be maintained free of significant surface cracks, dr) rot, warping, missing panels or blocks which either (i) threaten structural integrity, or (ii) result in a a~l~pidated, decaying, disfigured, partially ruined, appearance; (4) Parking and related surfaces. Parking surfaces and pedestrian walkways shall be maintained in a safe condition such that any concrete, asphalt or other drixdng or walking surfaces are free of potholes, buckled or cracked surfaces or raised areas; (5) Building elevations and roofs. Exterior building surfaces and roofs shall be main- tained free of significant surface cracks, missing materials, warping, d .ryrot or blocks, which either (i) threaten structural integrity, or (ii) result in a dilapidated, decaying, disfigured, partially ruined, appearance. (6) Trash and debris. The property shall be maintained free of the accumulation of trash and debris. Trash and debris associated with permitted uses are to be stored solely in designated trash enclosures. Any vi~lation of subsection 5502(m)(5) is hereby declared to be a misdemeanor. (Ord. No. 1080, Sec. 2, 11-18-91) 5503 PUBLIC NUISANCE a Authority to Abate and Impose Sanctions Enforcement of this chapter may be accomplished by the enforcement officer in any manner authorized by law. The procedures set forth in this chapter shall not be exclusive and shall not REV: 1-92 PS-5-6 TUSTIN CITY CODE PROPERTY MAINTENANCE, ETC. 5508e e Special Assessment Such special assessment shall be collected at the same time and in the same manner as ordinary municipal taxes are collected and shall be subject to the same penalties and the same procedures and sale in case of delinquency as provided for ordinary municipal taxes. f Refunds The City Council may order refunded all or part of an assessment paid pursuant to this chapter if it finds that all or part of the assessment has been erroneously levied. An assessment or any part thereof shall not be refunded unless a claim is fred with the City Clerk on or before December 1st after the assessment becomes due and payable. The claim shall be verified by the person who paid the assessment, or his guardian, executor, or administrator. (Ord. No. 1080, Sec. 2, 11-18-91) 5509 GENERAL PENALTY AND CONTINUING VIOLATIONS (a) Any person violating or f~,iling to comply with any provision or mandatory require- ment of this code shall be guilty of a misdemeanor unless charged as an infraction by the enforcement officer. Co) Each person guilty of a misdemeanor or infraction shall be guilty of a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which any violation of any provision of this Code is committed, continued or permitted by such person and shall be punished accordingly. (c) Any person who removes any notice or order posted as required in this chapter, for the purpose of interfering with the enforcement of the provisions of this chapter, is guilty of a misdemeanor unless charged as ar~ infraction by the enforcement officer. (d) Any person who obstructs, impedes or interferes with any representative of a City department or with any person who owns or holds an estate or interest in a building which has been ordered to be vacated, repaired, rehabilitated, or demolished or with any person to whom any such building has been lawfully sold pursuant to the provisions of this chapter when any of the aforementioned individuals are lawfully engaged in proceedings involving the abate- ment of a nuisance is guilty of a misdemeanor unless charged as an infraction by the enforce- ment officer. (e) The penalties and procedures provided in this chapter shall be cumulative and in addition to any other procedure or procedures provided in this Code or by state law for the abatement of any of the conditions described herein, and abatement hereunder shall not - prejudice or affect any other action, civil or criminal, for the maintenance of any such condi- tion. (Ord. No. 1080, Sec. 2, 11-18-91) 5510 SEVERABILITY It is declared to be the intention of the City Council that the sections, paragraphs, sen- tences, clauses and phrases of this chapter form interrelated regulations for dealing with the problem of property maintenance and public nuisances within the city, but that such sections, REV: 1-92 PS-5-12 TUSTIN CITY CODE ',OPERTY MAINTENANCE. ETC necessary to remove or isolate such dangerous condition, or conditions, with the use of City forces or a contractor retained pursuant to the provisions of this Code. (c) The enforcement officer shall keep an itemized account of the costs i. ncurred by the City in removing or isolating such condition, or conditions. Such costs may be recov- ered in the same manner that abatement costs are recovered pursuant to this chapter. (Ord. No. 1080, Sec. 2, 11-18-91) 5507 COSTS OF INSPECTION Whenever a public nuisance as defined in this chapter is found to exist as a result of said inspect/on, the reasonable costs for said inspection as set by City Council resolution shall be paid by the landowner. (Ord. No. 1080, Sec. 2, 11-18-91) 5508 ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AGAINST PROPERTY a Cost Assessment The enforcement o~cer, personnel or persons who abate the nuisance shall keep an account of the cost of abatement. Such personnel or persons shall submit an itemized written report showing such costs to the Community Development Department for transmittal to the City Clerk for City Council. b Hearing on Assessment The City Clerk shall thereupon set the report and account for hearing by the City Council at the £~rst regular meeting which will be held.at least seven (7) calendar days after the date of filing, and shall post a copy of said report and account and notice of the time and place of hearing in a conspicuous place in or near the entrance of the Tustin City Hall. The owner who is affected by such report and account shall be sent a notice advising him of the date, time and place of the hearing and said notice Shall be served. c Tax Lien The City Council shall consider the report amd account at the time set for hearing, to- gether with any objections or protests by any interested parties. Any owner of land or person interested therein may present a written or oral protest or objections to the report and account. The City Council may mod/fy the report if it is deemed necessary, and shall then confirm the report by motion or resolution. Pursuant to appropriate sections of the Government Code and in particular Section 38773.5 and Section 25845, the total costs of abatement including all administrative costs, shall constitute a special assessment against that parcel. After the as- sessment is made and conf'u'med, it shall be a lien on the property. d Cost Report Alter confirmation of the report, a certified copy shall be filed with the Orange County Aud/tar on or before August 10th of each year and the auditor shall be requested to enter the amounts of the respective assessments on the county tax roll. REV: 1-92 PS-5-11 ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT C ~ECEtYED RESOLUTION NO. 3592 16 17 18 19 20 22 24 25 26 27 29 Il. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE DECISIONS OF THE CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER CONTAINED IN THE NOTICE AND ORDER DATED APRIL 6, 1998, REQUIRING THE REMOVAL OF OVERGROWN WEEDS AND LANDSCAPING ALONG .WITH RENOVATION OF ALL DEAD OR MISSING LANDSCAPING AT 13151 RANCHWOOD ROAD, TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA. The Planning Commission of the City of Tustin hereby finds and determines as follows: ko A'complaint was received on March 9, 1998 by the Community Development Department regarding the condition of the property located at 13151 Ranchwood Road. Bo Staff inspected the property on March 10, 1998 and found the front yai'd to be in violation of Tustin City Code section 5502(m)(1) Landscape Maintenance and section 5502 (b) Public Nuisance. C, A Notice of Violation was sent to the property owner requesting that violations be abated by March 22, 1998. Do On April 1, 1998 the City Attorney received an inspection warrant from the Municipal Court of Orange County. This warrant allowed for the inspection of the exterior of the subject property. E, On April 2, 1998 staff posted the subject property with a notice stating that an inspection would be conducted on April 6, 1998. F. On April 6, 1998 the inspection warrant was executed. Marcella Napolitan, the property owner, was on the premises at the time of the inspection. e. On April 6, 1998 a Notice and Order of Public Nuisance was mailed to the property owner requesting clean-up of the property within (10) ten days of the notice. The notice also explained appeal rights as provided .by ordinance. Ho On April 13, 1998, the property owner filed an appeal of the Notice and Order. The property owner was notified of the date and time of the Planning Commission appeal hearing and the property w~s posted with the notice of the hearing. That the conditions on the property are still present and constitute a public nuisance. The Planning Commission hereby orders that the following actions be taken by the property owner of the property located at 13151 Ranchwood Road within 10 days of the date of the Planning Commission's action: ATTACHMENT D l0 14 20 2! 2.4 25 2.? Resolution No. 3592 Page 2 ko Remove all overgrown vegetation in side and rear yards of the subject property, except for the six trees, rose bushes and ornamental plants identified in the arborists report. Bo Remove of all dead landscaping, weeds, and fallen fruit in side and rear yards and dispose of the plant matter properly. C. Remove all roots, stumps and debris from the front yard. Do 'The front yard or any lawn areas visible from any public way and surrounding properties shall be properly maintained such that they are evenly 'cut, evenly edged, free of bare or brown spots, free of debris, stumps and weeds above the level of the lawn. All planted areas other than lawns shall be free of weeds, dead vegetation and debris. Any trees and shrubs shall be trimmed so they do not impede pedestrian traffic along the public sidewalk or intrude into neighboring property or have droppings or create other nuisances to neighboring property. Any trees shall be root pruned to eliminate exposed surface roots and damage to sidewalks, driveways and structures. Be The property shall be maintained in such a manner as to avoid the reasonable determination of a duly authorized official of the City that a public nuisance has been created by the absence of adequate maintenance, or that such a condition of deterioration is materially detrimental to property values or improvements within the boundaries of the Bellewick-Ranchwood Homeowners Association. !11. The Planning Commission hereby directs that if the order to abate the public nuisance conditions identified in Section II of the Resolution, has not been completed within the time frame allotted, the City shall immediately cause the same to be abated by City personnel or private contract. The owner of the property at 13151 Ranchwood Road shall be responsible to the City for all costs incurred by the City of Tustin to date and the cost of abatement. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission, held on the 26"' day of May, 1998. H OV~D~/T.~AN Chairman Planning Commission Secretary 10 ]4 2O 24 25 26 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) I, ELIZABETH BINSACK, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City.of Tustin, California; that Resolution No. 3592, was duly passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin Planning Commission, held on the 26th day of May,' 1998. Elizabeth Binsacl( ' v _ Planning Commission Secretary June 1, 1998 TO TUSTIN COUNCIL APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION As of May 30, 1998, Work has begun on altering the appearance of the frontfside and rear yards of the property at 13151Ranchwood Road in Tustin. Ail the stumps in the front part of the yard have been ground-out and arrangements are being made to install sprinklers and level and plant grass in the front yard. By tomorrow all of the trees along the walls and fences will be cut to the ground as close as possible. Ail of the work that has been done thus far has been paid for fully by me and all of the-rest of the work will be paid for totally by me. My appeal to the Planning Commission was based on the City of Tustin claiming that the trees in my yard were noxious, hazardous and unhealthy. No one has proven to me that any harm was done to anyone by any of the vegetation or trees growing in my yard. There was no reason whatsoever for anyone to incur any costs for any- ~ thing that was growing in my yard. It is totally outrageous for the city of Tustin to bill me in the amoun~ ot $3026.69. Ail of the work that was directed to be completed by April 6, 1998, was completed by April 5 as shown by Tony's Home Service work order dated April 4, 1998. On Page 3 of the Planning C~ission Report Appeal of Public Nuisance dated May 26, 1998, as far as I coui'~'~"The lowest bid" in the amount of $1,800 was nonexistant. In the last paragraph on that page it states "If the property owner refuses to pay the enforcement/abatement costs, the CityCouncil mayTplace a Tax Lien on the property after holding as Assess~=~.t hearing (TCC Section 5508)." In Rita Westfield's letter of May 27, 1998 whic~4did not receive until the afternoon of May 30th she is threatening to turn the bill over to a collection agency for the sole and punitive purpose of ruining my spotless credit rating. ATTACHMENT E Community Development Department r ! i May 27, 1998 Ci ty of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 (714) 573-3100 Marcella Napolitan 13151 Ranchwood Road Tustin, California 92780 Dear Ms. Nar)olitan: - On May 26, 1998, the City of Tustin Planni.rrg Commission denied your appeal of the Enforcement Officer's public nuisance determination of your property at 13151 Ranchwood Road. The Planning Commission directed that the front, side and rear yards of the property, be cleared with the costs be billed to you. The City will obtain estimates for the clearing and chemical treatment of both front, side and rear yards. Once those bids are received and a contractor is selected, I will schedule a meeting where you xvill be able to meet the contractor and review the Scope of Work to be performed. You xvill be responsible for the payment of this work and must submit a Cashiers Check payable to the City of Tustin in the amount of the bid before the work commences. Further, the Planning Commission directed that you be billed $3,026.69 for the costs incurred by the City of Tustin for the abatement of the public nuisance on your property. The Finance Department will be sending you a bill for this amount. Failure to pay in a timely manner can result in turning your debt over to a collection agency. If you have any questions regarding the details of these Costs please refer to your copy of the May 26, 1998 Planning Commission report. Section 5504 (b) of the Tustin City Code provides a process for appeal of the Planning Commissions public nuisance decision, if you wish to appeal their decision you must do so in writing and file your appeal with the City Clerk before 5:00 p.m. on Monday, June 1, 1998. I have attached-a copy of Section 5504 Co) for your information. Sincerely, R/t~ Westfield Assistant Director of Community Development CC Attachment Code Enforcement 1530 N VAN NESS Ave. ' SANTA-ANA;-, tDA-92706 Phone: iT,. ~. 4~ 836-0222 CITY, STATE. ; · i i t l I ! i I . KE'~,' THIS SLIP FOR R~, ,.a..NC;' SUMMARY OF ENFORCEMENT COSTS FROM MARCH 9, 1998-MAY 26, 1998 inspection of property. 5 inspections by Enforcement staff. Time 5 hours $196.80 Obtaining and execution of Inspection Warrant. April 1, 1998 Court appearance by Enforcement Staff: Time 2 hours $55.44 April 6, 1998 Execution of warrant at subject property by Code Enforcement, Field Services and Police Department Time 5 hours $160.78 Administrative Costs for the preparation of appeal to the Planning Commission, meeting and phone contact with the property owner by the Comm[~tlity Development Director, Assistant Community Development Director, Enforcement Officer, and Clerical Staff. Total Time 23 hours $763.67 Total Cos'~ for City Attorney Services' $1850.00 Subtotal Cost $3026.69 SUMMARY OF ENFORCEMENT COSTS FROM MAY 27, 1998 TO JUNE 15, 1998 i~specfio~l of the property. 3 inspections by Enforcement staff Total Time 3 hours $83.16 Admi~is~'ative Costs for the preparation of appeal to the Planning Commission, meeting and phone contact with the property owner by the Commui~ity Developme~ Director, Assistant Community Development Director, Enforcement. Officer, and Clerical Staff. Total Time J6 hours $ 597.32 Subtotal Cost $680.48 Total Cost $ 3,707.17 ATTACHMENT F RESOLUTION NO. 98-53 l0 20 _*9 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION THAT CERTAIN CONDITIONS ON THE PROPERTY AT 13151 RANCHWOOD CONSTITUTE A PUBLIC NUISANCE, REQUIRING THE RENOVATION OF ALL DEAD OR MISSING LANDSCAPING;' AND ASSESSING ENFORCEMENT/ABATEMENT COSTS TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows' Ao That a complaint was received on March 9, 1998 by the Community Development Department regarding the condition of the property located at 13151 Ranchwood Road. Staff inspected the property on March 10, 1998 and found the front yard to be in violation of Tustin City Code section 5502(m)(1) Landscape Maintenance and section 5502 (b) Public Nuisance. Bo That on April 6, 1998 a Notice and Order of Public Nuisance was mailed to the property owner requesting clean-up of the property within (10) ten days of the notice. The notice also explained appeal rights as provided by ordinance. C, That on April 13, 1998, the property owner filed an appeal of the Notice and Order. D, That a public hearing was duly called, noticed and held for said appeal on May 26, 1998 by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 3592 upholding the code enforcement officer's decision that the property was a public nuisance. E, That on June 1, 1998, the property owner appealed the Planning Commission's action. Fo That on June 2, 1998, the property owner initiated actions to remove the conditions on the property. The overgrown vegetation at the northerly side yard has not been abated and the front yard area has not been replanted and constitutes a public nuisance. G, That on June 15, 1998, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the appeal of Planning Commission 'Resolution No. 3592 and to consider assessing enforcement/abatement costs to the property owner. II. The City Council upholds the Planning Commission decision that a public nuisance exists on the property and hereby orders that the following 'actions be taken by the property owner of the property l0 20 24 27 28 Resolution N, -53 Page 2 III. located at 13151 Ranchwood Road within the noted days of the date of the City Council's action: A. That all vegetation, roots, tree/plant stumps, debris, etc. on the entire site shall be removed within 15 days of the Council's action. a. The front yard or any lawn areas visible from any public way and surrounding properties shall be re-landscaped and an irrigation system installed within 30 days of the Council action. Once replanted, the properly shall be properly maintained such that they are evenly cut, evenly edged, .free of bare or brown spots, free of debris, stumps and weeds above the level 'of the lawn. All planted areas other than lawns shall be free of weeds, dead vegetation and debris. Any trees and shrubs shall be trimmed so they do not impede pedestrian traffic along the public sidewalk or intrude into neighboring property or have droppings or create other nuisances to neighboring property. Any trees shall be root pruned to eliminate exposed surface roots and damage to sidewalks, driveways and structures. Co The property shall be maintained in a manner that is consistent with the standards of the neighborhood and so as to avoid the reasonable determination of a duly authorized official of the City that a public nuisance has been created by the absence of adequate maintenance, or that such a condition of deterioration is materially detrimental to property values or improvements within the boundaries of the Bellewick-Ranchwood Homeowners Association. Do That the property owner shall pay $3,707.17, the costs of abatement/enforcement within 30 days. Failure to pay these costs shall result in a lien being placed on the property by the City of Tustin. The City Council hereby directs that if the order to abate the public nuisance conditions identified in Section II of the Resolution, have not been completed within the time frame allotted, the City shall-cause the same to be abated by City personnel or private contract. The owner of the property at 13151 Ranchwood Road shall be responsible to the City for the cost of enforcement/abatement incurred to date and for those costs subsequently incurred if the City must contract for completing the vegetation removal, planting and installation of an irrigation system. l0 ]4 20 2! 24 27 Resolution No Page 3 53 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of June, 1998. THOMAS R. SALTARELLI Mayor PAMELA STOKER City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) CITY OF TUSTIN ) SS CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 98-53 PAMELA STOKER, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, Califomia, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is 5; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 98-53 was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 15t~ day of June, 1998. COUNCILMEMBER AYES: COUNCILMEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: PAMELA STOKER City Clerk