Council File:ll-2123 Council District: CD 9 Contact Person: Domingo Sauceda (213)

Transcription

1 LA DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFET\' May 18,2012 Council File:ll-2123 Council District: CD 9 Contact Person: Domingo Sauceda (213) Honorable Tony Cardenas, Chair Housing, Community & Economic Development Committee Los Angeles City Council c/o City Clerk City Hall, Room #395 Attention: Richard Williams, Legislative Assistant REPORT BACK ON MOTION REGARDING MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RENTAL HOUSING LOCATED AT WEST 49th STREET SUMMARY At a regular meeting held on January 18, 2012, the Housing, Community and Economic Development Committee (HCED) considered a Motion (Perry-Reyes) relative to the property located at West 49 1 h Street. The HCED directed the Los Angeles Housing Department (LAHD) and the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety (LADBS) to report on the substandard conditions at the property and corrective actions taken. Further, the HCED instructed the LAHD and LADBS to report on implementation of a case management structure to address these types of conditions going forward, and to determine the applicability of a Clean Hands Ordinance in preventing similar situations from developing in the future. In response to these instructions, the LADBS and LAHD respectfully submit this report to the I-ICED Committee for its consideration. BACKGROUND The structure at West 49th Street was originally constructed in 1908 as a single family dwelling (SFD). Plans were submitted and a permit was issued on August 9, 2007 to convert the SFD into a 3-unit apartment building. On November 10, 2009, a Certificate of Occupancy (CofO) was issued, officially converting the structure into a 3-unit apartment building. An Equal Opportunity I Affirmative Action Employer

2 Honorable Tony Cardenas Page 2 of5 C.IF As the result of subsequent extensive unauthorized and un-permitted construction work performed at West 49th Street, the 3-unit rental property was transformed from 3 units into 40 illegal housing accommodations without any City approvals, plans, permits, or City inspections. On April 14, 2011, the Los Angeles Housing Department (LAHD) responded to two complaints from tenants alleging various violations. The LAHD's research (based on the Los Angeles County Assessor's (LACA) records) neither reflected the change of use from a SFD to a 3-unit apartment building nor was it listed in the LAHD inventory. The LAHD determined that the structure was permitted as a SFD, and on April 18, 2011 referred the complaint to the Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety (LADBS), which handles SFD code enforcement. The LADBS researched its records upon responding to the complaint and discovered the CofO converting the SFD into a 3-unit apartment building. The LADBS referred this complaint back to the LAHD on May 5, 2011, which handles multi-unit code enforcement. LARD's Complaint Inspection staff responded promptly to address tenant concerns and followed established enforcement procedures including noticing the property owner of the tenants' complaints and of upcoming property inspections. Between June and October 2011, LARD performed inspections of the property and cited the property owner for multiple habitability violations and substandard living conditions, including illegal construction. LAHD instructed the owner to restore the property to its approved use as a triplex. Under provisions of the Housing Code (LAMC Chapter XVI), LAHD provided the property owner with a timeline to make the necessary repairs. However, despite additional time granted to make the repairs, by November 2011, the property owner failed to provide access to the property for the scheduled reinspection, and failed to correct the violations by the compliance date. LARD consulted with LADBS regarding the structural integrity of the building after inspectors noticed structural changes had been made to the building. On December 13, 2011, an LADBS Structural Engineer evaluated the property and concluded that the building required total vacation. Immediately following the LADBS' evaluation, LAHD issued a 30-Day Notice to Vacate the property and instructed the property owner to pay relocation assistance to the affected tenants. As a protective measure, LAHD ordered a 24-hour Fire Watch for notification to tenants should an emergency occur due to a fire. When the property owner failed to comply with the Vacate Order and failed to provide relocation assistance benefits by the deadline despite repeated requests, LAHD advanced $322,000 in relocation assistance benefits for 28 tenancies (C.F Sl). LAHD Recorded a Notice of Lien against the property with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office for cost recovery of benefits advanced and associated fees and penalties.

3 Honorable Tony Cardenas Page 3 ofs C.F. U-2123 CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS Currently, the property is vacant and properly secured. The property owner is making progress in complying with LAHD Orders to restore the property to its approved use and to correct the outstanding violations. As requested by the Motion, research of property records revealed another property owned by the same property owner and located at 5101 Granada Street. An inspection of that property revealed similar although less extensive violations including unapproved construction converting a single-family dwelling into a three-unit apartment, and the owner was cited by LADBS. The LADBS and LAHD forwarded both cases to the City Attomey for further legal enforcement actions. LAHD staff monitors the 49th Street property on a bi-weekly basis, and continue to do so until the owner is in compliance with the Notices. DISCUSSION This property is an example of an owner who intentionally performed construction work outside the scope of work authorized by the LADBS permit. The owner's actions placed residents of this building in unsafe living conditions. The extent and nature of the violations were extremely hazardous; both departments recognize the dangerous implications these conditions had on the tenants' health, safety, and well-being. In less than 30 days, multiple Housing Department personnel worked collaboratively with representatives of the tenant advocacy group Inner City Law Center to contact tenants and gather documentation needed for determining relocation assistance eligibility. This effort involved numerous on-site visits. During this process, LAHD submitted a motion that the I-ICED introduced on January 6, 2012 to request approval of relocation assistance benefits as the amount exceeded the $50,000 Departmental authority. On January 13, 2012, City Council adopted the motion. When the owner failed to take any corrective action by the compliance deadline of January 16, 2012, LAHD expedited relocation payments. Less than one week after the compliance deadline, on January 21 and 22, 2012, LAHD advanced relocation payments to the affected tenants. Among the recipients of the relocation benefit payments were some of the City's most vulnerable residents, including families with children, those with disabilities and elderly tenants. Most of the tenants were low-income and could not afford to relocate without the Housing Department's financial assistance. Following vacation of the property, LAHD followed-up on numerous occasions, and continues to do so, in order to verify that the building and the premises are properly boarded and secured. LESSONS LEARNED AND ACTION ITEMS LADBS and LAHD face a unique set of challenges when enforcement authority shifts from one department to another due to a change in approved occupancy. In response to the Committee's suggestion of a case management structure to address future cases, LAHD and LADBS convened a workgroup together to discuss challenges encountered in this case to identify gaps in training and procedure. The results of those discussions were a series of tasks and programs established when there is a question regarding authority between LADBS and LAHD. LADBS and the LAHD have held several high-level management meetings to address areas of improvement between the Departments with respect to single and multi-family housing code

4 Honorable Tony Cardenas Page 4 of5 C.F.H-2123 enforcement. Lessons learned include the need for more effective communication channels between Departments and additional sharing of information. The Departments have completed the following tasks: 1. Conducted five joint management meetings to review inspection and referral protocols as carried out at West 49th Street, and analyze options for a more effective response. 2. Updated the "Responsibility Matrix" which delineates enforcement jurisdiction between the LADBS and the LAHD (see attached). 3. Created and distributed a comprehensive geographic supervisory contact list from each Department to be distributed to every LADBS and LARD inspector to improve accessibility and communication between supervisors and management going forward. 4. Established a procedure that requires "first responders'' to act with greater care, urgency, and diligence when faced with health and safety violations: o Inspectors immediately refer questionable jurisdictional issues to their supervisor immediately. o Supervisors contact their Interdepartmental Counterparts (IC's) (named on the geographic supervisory contact list) for higher-level review and handling of cases that pose immediate hazards. o IC's will follow established protocols when conducting research and supply research documents to the other department. o IC's refer to the "Responsibility Matrix" to determine which Department is responsible to take enforcement action. o Communicate with other IC's to identify jurisdiction and provide relevant information. o Document the decision, and the responsible department proceeds with enforcement. o Both LADBS and LAHD follow established protocol that requires the first responder Department to address any issues that pose an immediate threat to the health and safety of the public, or identify a flagrant violation that poses a life safety threat to the public. 5. All inspection staff from both Departments were trained on new procedures, channels of communication, increased awareness, and responsibilities when addressing health and safety violations; both departments hold tailgate training with field personnel to clarify the inspection and referral protocol. 6. Scheduled follow-up meetings between the Departments to discuss key issues and further improve interdepartmental coordination.

5 Honorable Tony Cardenas Page 5 of5 C.F The LADBS and LAHD agree that the above steps, new procedures, and renewed commitment to jointly address health and safety issues immediately has greatly improved services provided to the public. Both LAHD and LADBS agree that it is important that the two departments work with a strong spirit of cooperation when addressing similar code violations, and have attached a higher level of urgency when the life and safety of the public is at stake. These tighter controls and improved communication ensure more effective and timely responses and smoother paths to compliance. CLEAN HANDS ORDINANCE The 'clean hands' ordinance, adopted by Los Angeles County and various cities across the nation, requires a jurisdiction to withhold the processing and issuance of a permit for new work on a property until the property owner corrects existing documented violations of all codes or regulations. The intent of the 'clean hands' ordinance is to prevent developers from maintaining or expanding an unapproved land use without obtaining approval from the local jurisdiction. The concept of the Ordinance has been extended to restrict property owners, with multiple outstanding violations on their property, from obtaining permits without first bringing their property into compliance, essentially making sure they have 'cleaned their hands' of existing violations. The City Council has instructed the City Planning Department, the City Attomey and the LADBS to prepare and present an ordinance which mirrors the Los Angeles County 'clean hands' policy (C.F. I ). After review ofthe Los Angeles County's policy, both LAHD and LADBS determined that the provisions did not apply to the 49th Street property. At the time of the pennit issuance, August 9, 2007, LADBS did not have any open cases containing documented, unresolved violations. On November 10, 2009, LADBS found that the property owner completed the work authorized within the scope of the permit, and issued a Certificate of Occupancy. At that point, there were no outstanding violations at the property. We thank you for your continued support of the important services we provide to maintain the basic need of safe housing for our City's residents. Approved By: ~or= RUSHMORE CERVANTES Interim General Manager Housing Department General Manager Department of Building & Safety cc: Honorable Antonio R. Villaraigosa Mayor, City of Los Angeles c/o Mandy Morales, Legislative Coordinator

6 ~~~~-~ ~ -..m.ncm. ~~ LADBS & LAHD Responsibility Matrix for Multi-Family Housing Code Enforcement March 1, 2012 Responsible Department Code Enforcement Item LAHD LADBS BUILDING INTERIOR a. Respond to Complaints _, b. All other interior related code violations,_ ~-~,-- c. Construction authorized by permit(s)., v 0~-, d. Construction NOT authorized by permit(s) - 1/,,.,.~. e. Disabled Access c-~moo f. Electrical -- v ~.~,~-... g. Elevators v h. ExitinQ _, i. Habitability -~" j. HeatinQ & Refrigeration - k. Inter-agency Housing Task Force (IHTF) -~ ~. -~ ~~-~ I. Life Safety - ~ "' m. Maintenance - "'"-'' --~~,,.~-- n. Plumbing <h- 0. Use & Occupancy (Building and Zoning) BUILDING EXTERIOR a. Respond to Complaints - b. All other exterior related code violations v - c. Construction authorized by permit(s) "'"O.-ru..oMcccc>~-n d. Construction NOT authorized by permit(s} ~.. ~- -'~ -~-- -'-"'"'-' -~ ~ e. Disabled Access 1/ ~-.. -~... f. GradinQ/Siope failure g. Graffiti - - ~ ~ ~~-"""'""""'''"'""""'""""'~h ~~ h. LiQhtinQ (Excessive to adioininq properties) 1/ i. Maintenance v j. Noise from stationary sources, fixed equipment k. Parking area/open storage/abandoned vehicles t/ """""""'"""- I. Parking in front/side/rear yards t/... m. Trash, debris, excess vegatation v n. Use of Property (Building and Zoning) v -~ ~ 0. Vacant and/or Abandoned buildings or Vacant properties v SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY (SRO) HOTELS & MOTELS a. Respond to Complaints v """~" b. Construction authorized by permit(s),.,._,_,..., c. Construction NOT authorized by permit(s) v NON-SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY (SRO) HOTELS & MOTELS a. Respond to Complaints (See below) v -~ ~ b. Residential Hotels (Prim<!_ry residence for 1 more than 50% of units) -- v,_,_~-- c. Transient occupancy Hotels (Guests stay less than 30 days) v CONDOMINIUMS AND TOWNHOUSES a. Respond to compliants v... ~~~ - b. Respond to need for any Code Enforcement Activity v EMERGENCY RESPONSE Whichever agency, LAHD or LADBS, receives an emergency call, that agency a. will respond and take the necessary action. If LADBS field staff is unavlilable to respond, LAHD staff will respond. The appropriate agency will follow up on v 1/ subsequent action needed, and continued enforcement action to resolution.