Loading...
RPVCCA_CC_SR_2015_04_07_02_Request_Waiver_Penalty_Fees_ATF_Permits_2102_Noble_View�^v CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITOUNIELOPMENT MEMBERS FROM: JOEL ROJAS, AICP, COMMUNIT DIRECTOR DATE: APRIL 7, 2015 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF THE PENALTY FEES FOR AN AFTER -THE -FACT (ATF) MINOR EXCEPTION PERMIT AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT ON A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2102 NOBLE VIEW (CASE NO. ZON2013-00146) REVIEWED: DOUG WILLMORE, CITY MANA ER Vl� 0 Project Manager: Leza Mikhail, Associate Planner VW RECOMMENDATION Approve the Applicant's request to waive the $1,707 penalty fee for an after -the -fact (ATF) Minor Exception Permit for a combination wall and Deny the Applicant's request to waive the $1,726 penalty fee for an Encroachment Permit for a wall/pilaster in the public right-of- way. BACKGROUND On April 16, 2008, the City received a complaint regarding unpermitted construction related to a rear property line combination wall. As a result of the complaint, a Code Enforcement case was opened on the subject property because of the installation of a new vinyl fence on top of an existing retaining wall in the rear yard, and the construction of a pilaster (topped with a light) in the public right-of-way along the front property line. After several years of correspondence between the City, City Attorney and Property Owner ("Applicant"), on April 15, 2013, the Applicant submitted after -the -fact (ATF) Minor Exception Permit and Encroachment Permit applications to the Community Development Department to legalize the improvements. At that time, the Applicant paid the required permit fees ($3,433), but did not pay the required penalty fees ($3,433). Instead, the Applicant submitted a fee waiver request for the penalty fees. On May 15, 2013, the application was deemed incomplete for processing due to missing information on the project plans, and due to the fact that the combination wall did not meet the height qualifications for a Minor Exception Permit. Between May 2013 and March 2014, 1 the Applicant worked with City Staff and the City Attorney's office to reduce the height of the combination wall to be in substantial compliance with the City's Development Code. On March 4, 2014, the Applicant lowered the height of the combination wall to the City's satisfaction. However, the permit application remained incomplete due to the fact that the Penalty Fee required by the Municipal Code for ATF applications had not been paid. On February 23, 2015, the Applicant submitted the required penalty fee ($3,433.00) for the ATF applications. Subsequently, the application was deemed complete for processing on February 24, 2015. On March 16, 2015, after a Public Notice was issued to the required adjacent neighbors, the Director approved, with conditions, the ATF Minor Exception Permit and Encroachment Permit. The appeal period expired on March 31, 2015, with no appeals submitted to the City. The Applicant's Fee Waiver request is now being presented to the City Council. DISCUSSION Pursuant to Section 17.78.010(C) of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code (RPVDC), the City Council may grant a request to waive the fees associated with a development application if it finds that: 1. The applicant or the beneficiary of the use or activity proposed by the applicant is a nonprofit corporation registered with the State of California; or 2. The use or activity proposed or the activities of the beneficiary of the use or activity proposed are charitable, educational or otherwise provide a substantial benefit to the public; or 3. The applicant has demonstrated a financial hardship, as determined by the City Council, on a case by case basis. As described in the attached letter, the Applicant states that the additional cost of $3,433.00 for the ATF penalty fees required by the City is a financial hardship and the property owner feels singled out due to the fact that there are many other properties in his neighborhood with similar structures as his, and do no have permits. It should be pointed out that in 2007, the City received a similar complaint regarding unpermitted construction of a combination wall along his east side yard property line, and at that time, the Applicant submitted and paid the application and penalty fees for a Grading Permit ($254.00 x 2 = $508.00) and Minor Exception Permit ($416.00 x 2 = $832.00). It was subsequently determined by Staff that the Minor Exception Permit was not required for the east side yard combination wall as the Applicant was replacing a previously permitted and existing wood fence on top of a retaining wall with a white vinyl fence at the same height. On April 9, 2008, a decision was rendered on the Grading Permit associated with the east side yard wall. Subsequently, the permit fee and penalty fee for the Minor Exception Permit, less Staff's time working on the permit, were refunded to the property in 2 the amount of $567.50. On April 16, 2008, seven days after a determination was made on the east side yard wall, the City received a new complaint regarding the illegal construction of a combination wall along the rear property line, and a wall and pilaster (topped with a light) in the public right- of-way. In conversations with the Applicant, the Applicant feels that the City should have considered both the side and rear yard fences at the same time, but understands that the complaining parties filed two separate code enforcement cases at different times, thereby resulting in additional fees and time. Looking back at what occurred in 2008, Staff is of the opinion that the processing of two separate applications caused the applicant an unnecessary financial burden, as the City could have processed the Minor Exception Permit for the rear yard combination wall in 2008 when the applicant initially submitted a Minor Exception Permit for the east side yard wall. This would have avoided the Applicant paying the additional penalty fee. Given these circumstances, Staff is recommending that the City Council waive the penalty fee in the amount of $1,707.00 for the Minor Exception Permit. In addition to the request to waive the penalty fee for the Minor Exception Permit, the applicant is requesting that the City Council waive the penalty fee for the Encroachment Permit in the amount of $1,726.00. Although the applicant is noting a financial hardship for this fee, given that the same situation described above for the Minor Exception permit does not apply to the Encroachment Permit, Staff does not believe that the applicant should be refunded the penalty fee for the Encroachment Permit. It should be noted that the applicant has not submitted any proof or evidence of financial hardship. The Applicant has been advised of the City Council's consideration of this request at tonight's meeting, and has been provided with a copy of the Staff Report. ALTERNATIVES In addition to Staff's recommendation, the alternatives available for the City Council's consideration include: Approve the requested waiver of the ATF penalty fees for the Minor Exception Permit and Encroachment Permit in the amount of $3,433.00. 2. Grant a reduction in the application fee, in an amount to be determined by the City Council. 3. Deny the requested waiver of the ATF penalty fees for the Minor Exception Permit and Encroachment Permit and retain the full $3,433.00 penalty fee. CONCLUSION Staff believes that the applicant's request to waive the ATF fee associated with Minor Exception Permit is warranted, but that the requested waiver for the ATF penalty fee for the 9 Encroachment Permit is not warranted. Therefore, Staff recommends that the City Council approve the applicant's request to refund $1,707.00 for the Minor Exception Permit, but deny the applicant's request to refund $1,726.00 for the Encroachment Permit. FISCAL IMPACT The approval of the requested fee waiver will result in the City refunding the $1,707.00 penalty fee that was paid by the property owner, Mr. Bautista, for the Minor Exception Permit. The costs of this refund will be borne by the City's General Fund. Attachments: Fee waiver request (page 5) 11 To City of Rancho Palos Verdes April 15, 2013 This letter is in regards to our property at 2102 Noble View Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes, Ca. 90275 My wife and I spoke to Greg Host on April 10, 2013 regarding permits and matters. We are requesting a waiver of penalties on permits that total ($3400.00) . We are not financially able to pay or able to postdate a check. Also request for no penalties is because my Wife and I feel Singled out and Discriminated against due to the fact that if we are in violation of code we are not the only property, (properties) in violation and if so no permits were filed with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. We have complied with many requests through out the years even though some have taken longer than others. My wfe and I have given a lot towards resolving these matters and really what is this based upon (a complaint). We do want this behind us, it has been a long time. It probably in our opinion could have been a lot easier but hopefully it is going to be resolved sooner than later. We feel with compliance with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for permits adding up to $3400.00 and compromise and sacrifice to satisfy all involved, it can be finally be resolved. We have every intention to comply with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. We also want to be satisfied with what we are doing to resolve these matters. Thank You, Mr. & Mrs. Stephen Bautista 2102 Noble View Drive Rancho Palos Verdes 90275 OECEIVED AFAR 15 2013 ► COMMUNITY r)EVELOPMEW ' pRT1WE%VT 5