HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2005-04-11 Item 4D - Discussion - Code Enforcement to Improve Housing Stock Co U AGENDA SYNOPSIS
.LA, 1
k Initials ITEM No
P 't p Aleetin Date Prepared b 1 Ma}'gr's review I Council review
-10 04/11/05 1 SL I 1 ;l
ITEM INFORMATION
CAS NUMBER: 05-064 ORIGINAL AGENDA DA'Z'E: 04/11/05
AGENDA ITEM TITLE Using Code Enforcement to Improve Housing Stock
CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 4 -11 -05 IVItg Date Mt& Date lVIt& Date Mtg Date Altg Date Altg Date
SPONSOR Council Mayor Adin Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PIT
SPONSOR'S A proposal to take a more proactive approach to code enforcement for certain specific code
SUMMARY violations.
REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DA'Z'E: 3 -15 -05
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. COW to provide policy direction
COMMITTEE Forward to COW for further discussion
COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
Fund Source:
Comments: Until Council provide policy direction the budget costs are unknown.
MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
4 -11 -05
MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS
4 -11 -05 Memo dated 4 -11 -05 from S. Lancaster with attachments.
City ofTukwila
Steven M. Mullet} Mayor
Department of Community Development
Steve Lancaster; Director
FROM:
Committee of the Whole ~ vJ--'
Steve Lancaster, Director of Dept. o~munity Development
TO:
DATE:
April" 11,2005-
SUBJECT:
U sing Code Enforcement to Improve Housing Stock
Back1!round
In January 2005 during the Council Retreat, the Council reviewed two issue papers from
Code Enforcement: "Proactive Code Enforcement" and "Rental Housing Licensing."
Copies of these documents are attached (Exhibit Al & A2).
A presentation was made to the Community Affairs and Parks Committee on March 15,
2005. A copy of this paper and the minutes from the CAP meeting are attached (Exhibit
B 1 & B2). The committee supported a more proactive approach to code enforcement but
wanted to discuss the specifics with the Committee of the Whole. The CAP also wanted
further discussion on other policies to improve the condition of rental housing.
These issues are now before the Committee of the Whole for further discussion and
direction.
It is generally agreed that improvements to the overall housing stock in Tukwila would
benefit the community by attracting long-term residents and encouraging more
community involvement by its citizens. Citizens who take pride in their community are
more likely to provide a stable environment for business and family and may even reduce
crime. Contributing to the deterioration of neighborhoods are issues of housing
conditions, debris, junk vehicles and other nuisances. Substandard conditions are present
in some apartments: non-working appliances, leaking fixtures, mold, lack of heat or
smoke detectors, etc. All of these conditions lead to high turnover rates, less community
~ investment and perpetuate the cycle of deterioration.
6300 Southcenter Boulevard} Suite #100 · Tukvl/ila, vVashington 98188 · Phone: 206-431-3670 · Fax: 206-431-3665
COW Memo
April 11, 2005
Page 2
Purpose of this Memo:
Based on the direction from CAP, we are presenting to you additional information for
discussing changes to the way we enforce codes.
Proactive Code Enforcement.
It is staff s belief that a more proactive approach to certain code enforcement issues in
resideI?-tial areas would haye a pQsitive impact on the appearance of Tukwila
neighborhoods by raising standards and expectations.
The questions before this Committee involve several parts:
a) Does the Council want to implement a more pro-active approach to Code
Enforcement in the residential neighborhoods?
Currently, Tukwila practices a reactive approach to code enforcement. We investigate
complaints. Proactive code enforcement is practiced by a number of jurisdictions in
Washington including many of our neighboring communities. (See Exhibit C for City of
SeaTac chart). Usually it is limited to a few select egregious violations that the
community has determined are particularly troublesome, such as junk vehicles,
derelict/abandoned buildings, etc. The residents would probably perceive proactive code
enforcement as a "more fair" approach to certain violations. We would be contacting
ALL the "violators" on the block, rather than targeting only the one or two we had
received complaints on.
b) IfTukwila takes a proactive approach, which code violations should Code
Enforcement pursue?
If the council wants to pursue a more proactive approach, Council and staff need to
prioritize the list of violations to determine which ones will be enforced pro actively and
which-will remain reactive or complaint-based.
COW Memo
April 11, 2005
Page 3
Following is a chart showing the most common violations investigated, the percentage of the total number of
cases generated in 2004, and which of these the staff believes should be enforced proactively.
Violation 2004 Comments Staff Council
Choice Recom-
mendation
Building w/o required 26% Handled by building inspectors. CE Yes
permits staff manages files & follow-ups.
LJnsecuredJunsafe with "Vacant and derelict structures exist Yes
buildings/unfit for habitation above throughout the city.
Trash and deb_ris/ abandoned 17%- _One of the highest violation areas. Yes
materials on private prop. Huge visible effect.
Junk vehicles 16% One of the highest, most visible Yes
violations. Proactive enforcement
would have huge impact.
Illegal parking on residential with New "improved surface" requirement Yes for
property. above for residential parking. more than
3
Commercial vehicles in with Only one commercial vehicle is
residential areas above permitted to park on the driveway of
the operator of the vehicle. (Not on the
street) .
Sign Code Violations 13% Could be addressed via education
(No permits, & illegal signs) program for business o\vners & review
of sign code.
Overgrown weeds 10% This violation usually coupled 'with
(Blackberries, etc.) trash/debris.
Substandard housing 5% For multi-family units difficult to
(Too many people, address pro actively without inspection
conditions, etc.) requirement.
LJse - illegal ADLJ's 1% May want to address this together with
multi-family units
Noise (mostly Police) 1% Reactive only
Graffiti above Proactive for commercial & residential Yes
Odors above Reactive only
Code enforcement staff believes that concentrating on junk vehicles, vehicle parking, trash/debris, and
dereloct buildings pro actively in the single-family neighborhoods in Tukwila would significantly improve
their appearance. Neighboring cities have experienced noticeable positive improvements after initiating
proactive code enforcement. Proactive inspections of apm1ment grounds would also contribute to visual
improvements in those areas. Proactive enforcement of all graffiti on both commercial and residential
properties is also necessary.
COW Memo
April 11, 2005
Page 4
c) Should Proactive code enforcement of these identified items be conducted either city-
wide (by violation) or geographically (by neighborhood)?
Proactive code enforcement of the highest priority violations, conducted geographically,
would have the greatest impact visually on improving any given neighborhood. By
concentrating on one particular neighborhood for a set length of time, then moving on to
the next (adjacent) neighborhood, Code Enforcement, over the course of a year or two
would have covered the entire city, requiring residents to comply. We believe that by the
time we address the third or fourth neighborhood, the City's intention to "clean things
up" would be apparent to ALL citizens, encouraging neighbors to clean up on their own.
The ot~er option would be. to enforce proactively one particular violation (i.e., junk
vehicles) over the entire city for a longer length of time. This effort may not produce
such dramatic visual and measurable results.
d) How can we address issues in n'lultifamily housing proactively?
The most serious issues involving multi-family dwellings concern the conditions inside
the units themselves, not the exterior premises. Exterior premises emphasis can be
easily accomplished pro actively by regularly driving through the complexes noting junk
vehicles, overflowing dumpsters and the like.
The interior problems, such as inadequate or non-working fixtures and appliances, or
other unsanitary and substandard conditions are less easily remedied. Either the landlord
or the tenant must allow us access. The City Attorney's office has suggested that the City
wait for the results of the currently pending lawsuit by the City of Pasco regarding
required inspections of apartments for housing code violations before considering adding
a mandatory inspection requirement to our business license process for multi-family
units. (See Exhibit D).
Any changes to the business license requirement for rental housing (such as requiring a
business license for all rental units), and any associated inspection programs are areas
which would need much additional research, discussion, and input from the City Attorney
before implementation. Attached (Exhibit E) is a matrix with some information on
business license requirements from neighboring cities and some web site addresses for
further research. Staff can return to the Council at a later date to discuss this issue.
e) Should the city require some form of permit, registration, or business licensing of
Accessory Dwelling Units (AD U, or ((mother-in-law apartment'')?
Currently, Accessory Dwelling Units are permitted as an "Accessory Use" in the LDR,
MDR, HDR, MUO, 0, RCC,& NCC zones. ADUs can be used as rentals, provided that
the owner of the property resides in one of the units. Other restrictions include
appearance, minimum lot size, off-street parking, etc. ADU's are an important part of the
COW Memo
April 11 , 2005
Page 5
overall housing stock in Tukwila, providing affordable alternatives for some residents
and helping Tukwila reach our county housing targets.
While this is not creating an immediate issue for code enforcement, the City may want to
look at some form of registration of ADDs at the same time they consider business
license requirements for other rental properties. An ADD registration "amnesty"
program could be developed, similar to the City of Seattle's program, which would
ensure that ADDs are identified and meet minimum standards for occupancy.
Neighboring cities require such registration (SeaTac, Federal Way). Both SeaTac and
Federal Way also permit ADD's in detached structures, as long as they meet size,
setbac~, appearance_and other_ criteria.
Conclusion
Improvement to the overall housing stock in Tukwila is a long-term and complicated
process involving changing expectations, vigorous enforcement of codes, and a
commitment on the part of the City that these changes are important and necessary for the
overall health of our neighborhoods. It will not be a quick fix, but will have lasting
impacts to this community. The problem deserves discussion, and implementation of any
new programs would benefit from the consensus of the community. Starting "small"
with one or two new changes will get this ball rolling. Once we experience some success
we may want to consider additional code changes to implement.
Staffs proposal for the next 12-18 months (2005-2006) is as follows:
1. Implement a proactive approach to code enforcement for the items the Council has
determined are the biggest problems in our single-family neighborhoods. Staff
believes these are junk vehicles, improper storage of vehicles Gunk or otherwise)
trash/debris and derelict buildings.
2. Conduct emphasis patrols for these identified code violations on a geographic basis
(by neighborhood). We would continue our "kinder and gentler" approach to
problem solving, but would be contacting more individuals about their code
violations.
3. Begin emphasis patrols targeting apartment complexes paying particular attention to
the "hot spot" area around 144th and Tukwila International Blvd. These patrols would
involve regular, frequent inspections of exterior conditions, such as junk vehicles,
overflowing dumpsters and landscape maintenance.
COW Memo
April 11, 2005
Page 6
4. Communicate to residents through Hazelnut articles, flyers, and possible general
mailings that code enforcement will be looking for specific code violations in
residential neighborhoods, that we can assist with identifying junk vehicles for proper
removal, and that we can assist tenants with problems related to unresponsive
landlords and substandard conditions in apartments.
Analyzing the effectiveness of these four items in 18 months would give us good data for
moving forward with additional changes, such as licensing and required inspection of
apartments.
Impacts to Staffing
Implementing a proactive approach to code enforcement would require additional
staffing. One additional Code Enforcement Officer and one full-time administrative
support person would be the minimum requirement to accomplish the initial proposal. In
real terms, this would be the equivalent of an additional 1.5 FTE.
Below is a cost summary for 2005,2006 and beyond:
2005
Start by increasing staff by .5 FTE (mid-year)
(This amount has been approved for the 2005 budget)
$30,000
2006
Salary/Benefits
Vehicle Purchase
Miscellaneous hard assets (equip/computer/legal)
$86,000
$22,000
$20,000
2007 and beyond
Salary/Benefits for 1.5 additional FTE
$86-96,000
Next Steps
Based on the COW's direction, staff is prepared to start the phase-in of proactive code
enforcement in the next several months. A comprehensive communication plan for
Tukwila residents needs to be developed as well as streamlined processes for the
expected higher volume of cases.
Proactive Code Enforcement
January 13, 2004
Problem: Code violations exist throughout the city that may not be addressed because no
citizen complaints are received.
Existing Condition: The City ofTukwila's Code Enforcement program currently works
on a complaint basis. We do not proactively enforce nuisance violations. Complaints
received from City employees are investigated, as are complaints received from citizens
at large, but we do not condu,ct emphasis patrols as a general rule.' .
Discussion: Proactive code enforcement of certain nuisance violations could improve the
appearance of neighborhoods and establish a higher standard overall for the City.
Potential proactive campaigns could be for junk vehicles, illegal vehicle parking in the
residential areas, trash and -debris. visible from the street, severe weed overgrowth or
obvious and severe structural deterioration.
City of SeaTac practices proactive code enforcement for certain violations. (See the
reverse side for examples of that City's Code Enforcement policies.)
1. Should these proactive investigations be pri~arily in the residential areas?
2. Should we designate a particular neighborhood for emphasis patrol (2005 is the year
of Cascade View, for instance)? .
3. Or, should the City concentrate on a particular type of violation Gunk vehicles or
vehicle parking, say) in all the residential areas?
Advantages: City wide and region wide perceptions of neighborhood standards will
slowly change due to the communication and enforcement effort that would be a
necessary part of any proactive enforcement.
Successful abatement of nuisances.
Disadvantages: Current staffing assignments would need to be reallocated in order to be
more proactive or more staff would be needed. Tukwila may gain a reputation for
interference in private matters.
Q;\mcb\HOUSING\Proactive Code enforcement-doc
EXHIBIT A-I
Rental Housing Licensing
January 13, 2004
Problem: There is a perception that rental housing is the source of the majority of calls for
service and code violations in residential neighborhoods. Without accurate information this
assumption cannot be demonstrated.
Existing Condition: The City requires owners of rental property consisting of five or more.
units to obtain an annual business license. Single family, duplex, triplex and fourplex units
are not asked to comply with the licensing requirement.
Di~cussion: The C{ty has no way ~fknowing how many rental dwelling units or how many
accessory dwelling units may exist.
. -
Is it desirable to require a business license for single family, duplex, triplex and fourplex
owners?
)> City ofSeaTac requires all rental properties to obtain a business license.
)> City of Kent requires properties with three or more units to get a business
license;
)> City ofBurien requires properties with four or more units to get a rental housing
license (for a fee) and a "no-fee" business license. In Bunen, the fees generated
are dedicated to crime prevention specifically related to rental housing.
Since residential rentals are generally "for profit" operations, it is reasonable for the City to
require a business license.
Ifa rental property is the subject of repeated code enforcement complaints (such as more
than two per year) would the City withold or revoke the business license until the violations
are resolved?
Advantages:
The City would have regularly updated contact information provided on the buiness license
application fonn.
Information provided on the business license form would be helful in establishing occupancy
limits (based upon the standards in the adopted International Property Maintenance Code)
and other code rdated items.
Having better data on the total number of dwelling units and the percentage of rentals may be
helpful in analyzing housing capacity in the City as well as ways to improve the City's
housing programs and services.
Disadvantages:
Staff workload to process the licenses.
Resistance from owners of sma1l retal properties.
Difficulty of enforcement.
EXHIBIT
A-2
City of Tukwila
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Department of Community DeYelopment
Steve Lancaster, Director
TO:
Community Affairs and Parks Committee
FROl\tI:
Steve Lancaster, Director of Dept. of Community Development
~VJ-
DATE:
March 4,2005
SUBJ:
Using Code Enforcement to Improve Housing Stock
Back{!round
In January of this year, Code Enforcement presented two issue papers for review by City Council- at'their
annual retreat, Proactive.Code Enforcement, and Rental HQusing Licensing (See Attachments A and B).
The intent of this paper is to explore these two issues in greater depth and solicit direction from City
Counc il.
Problem
City Council has expressed a desire to improve the overall housing stock ill the community. Some of
Tukwila's neighborhoods struggle to attract long-term residents; due at least partly to issues of housing
conditions, debris, junk vehicles and other nuisances. This leads to high turnover rates, less comlnunity
investment and perpetuates the cycle of deterioration.
Possible Solutions
1. Take a more Dro-active aPDroach in code enforcement
It is staffs belief that a more pro-active approach to code enforcement issues in residential areas for
specific types of violations (dangerous buildings, junk vehicles, trash, parking) would have a positive
impact on the appearance of Tukwila neighborhoods, by raising standards and expectations. The
difficulty in dealing with complaint based code enforcement is that it usually involves one property only,
in a neighborhood where there may be a multitude of similar or related violations on neighboring sites.
While the City may be able to resolve issues at the "reported" site, notl1ing is addressed on surrounding
properties. Changes are virtually "unnoticed" in most cases. Proactive code enforcement can make a real
difference in improving the appearance of entire neighborhoods.
Existing ordinances and regulations (the International Property Maintenance Code, Tukwila Municipal
Cbde for nuisances) already provide the needed enforcement tools to deal with issues that would arise as a
result of a more aggressive approach to code enforcement.
EXHIBIT
B-1
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 · Tukwila, Washington 98188 · Phone: 206-431-3670 · Fax: 206-431-3665
Memo to CAP on Housing
March 4, 2005
Page 2
The City of SeaTac has taken a balanced approach by establishing a priority list for proactive vs. re-active
code enforcement:
City of SeaTac
Code Enforcement Policies
Proactive Reactive
Improperly disposed garbage Work without Permits
(Proactive by building
inspectors)
Dangerous Buildings Substandard housing-mirior
Attractive Nuisances. *Noise
.Inoperable/Junk Vehicles *Minor residential parking
Overgrown vegetation * Fences
Discarded items *Non-domestic animals
Graffiti *Residential rental business
license
Proactive Reactive
Major illegal Residential parking Metal canopy structures
(more than two parked on grass)
Commercial Cargo Containers Residential cargo containers
Signs Garage sales
Commercial business license Illegal duplex.
Home occupation-business license Vacant buildings
Commercial parking
Substandard housing - major
Tent/canopy structures . Tent/canopy structures
. Appearance of newness . More than 3 tent/canopies on
. More than one canopy in front yard one lot
. Tent structure in front yard . Canopy located in front yard
. No primary residence setback
. Exceeds 15' in height . Canopy in front yard without
neighbor approval
. Closer than 3' to side property
line
. Exceeding lot coverage
limitations
. Fabric/material not flame
retardant
. Color of tent or canopy
. Structure not anchored per
manufacturer's specs
. Structure used for other than
storage
* Wait for complaint - give verbal warning
Memo to CAP on Housing
March 4, 2005
Page 3
Several neighboring cities take a pro-active approach in addressing a core set of code violations. For
instance, SeaTac has prioritized a comprehensive list of violations and determined which issues will be
dealt with pro-actively. Code Enforcement staff are passionate about the fact that this approach has
dramatically reduced certain types of violations, and improved the overall appearance of "problem"
neighborhoods. (Attachment C)
Currently, Tukwila Code Enforcement staff investigate the following types of violations: trash/debris,
signs, substandard housing, illegal use, quilding without required permits, abandoned and junk vehicles,
vehicle parking/storage, weed overgrowth, misc. (noise, animals, odors, etc)
Staff is seek,ing Council direction. in prioritizing those violations that, when addressed pro-actively, would
have the most positive impact on housing conditions in Tukwila.
2. Business Licenses for Multi-Familv Property/Accessory DweUinf! Units
Another approach might be to consider requiring a business license for all rental units. The Housing
Needs Assessment of June, 2004 prepared by Huckell/\Veinmann Associates, Inc. validated the belief that
the majority of Tukwila households (57.6%) are renters. Tukwila is one of two communities in South
King County in which there are more renters than owners. The composition of Tukwila's housing stock
is unique in that it has fewer single family structures and more larger multi-family properties. Nearly
20% of the City's single family housing stock is renter-occupied.
Currently, the City only requires owners of rental property consisting of five or more units to obtain an
annual business license. Single family, duplex, triplex and fourplex units are exempt from this
requirement.
A business license requirement for all rental units is not unusual- it is a require"ment that has been
implemented all over the country and throughout Washington State (see Attachnlent D). Given that the
majority of Tukwila households are renters it is probable that the majority of our code enforcement cases
in the residential areas involve renter occupied housing. A business license requirement for rental
housing would give us an additional tool to gain compliance. Staff believes that some landlords are
blissfully unaware of the condition of their property or how their tenants are behaving in the community.
A business license annually renewed, coupled with occasional inspections of the grounds could assist the
landlords in ridding themselves of undesirable tenants - ~~The City won't renew my license until the junk
vehicles are gone. This is grounds for eviction." It would also send a message to tenants that Tukwila
won't tolerate the mess any longer. An annually renewed business license would ensure that we have
current contact information for the owner, including phone numbers. A fee-reduction may be incentive
for landlords to participate in Crime-Free Multi-Housing programs and is something that should be
considered as well.
~
Memo to CAP on Housing
March 4, 2005
Page 4
A subset of rental licensing involves Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Not all AD Us are occupied by
family members. Some units are used as rentals, which is permitted under Tukwila regulations. In order.
to meet the State's mandated housing goals, it is important we identify all housing in our community. In
2004, Code Enforcement investigated several complaints of illegal ADU's Code Enforcement believes
this is only the tip of this iceberg. Usually these complaints involved garage or olltbuilding conversions
to living quarters without permit. Tukwila code requires that ADUs be in attached structures constructed
to blend in with the main structure so as to appear to be a single family residence. Only one ADU is
permitted for each single family property. The real concerns regarding ADUs have to do with adequacy
of egress, adequate parking for tenants, and use of substandard structures (sheds, garages, etc.) as living
quarters. Illegal conversions undoubtedly also entail illegal and unpermitted electrical and plumbing
installations and possibly inadequate se\ver or septic systems.
In order to identify and ensure th(lt structures used as ADU's meet our regulations, the City may want to
consider requiring registration for each unit. Registration would give the City a more complete picture of
the nature of the housing stock in the City. If an ADD is rented, the property owner would then need to
obtain a business license. The registration process could be implemented gradually over one or two years,
allowing for an "amnesty" period and be a no-fee or very low- fee cost. It could also include some form
of cursory inspection to ensure basic adherence to building, fire and housing code standards.
Summary
Proactive code enforcement of specific types of violations will have a positive affect on raising housing.
standards in Tukwila. Suggested items to enforce proactively are junk vehicles, vehicle parking
violations (more than two or three cars parked illegally on private property), trash and debris, dangerous
buildings, and weed overgrowth. There are two possible approaches to proactive code enforcement:
a) geographically (neighborhood by neighborhood) or, b) target specific violations, City-wide. Staff
recommends a geographic approach.
Implementing a business license req uirement for all rental units and ADD's could be phased in
gradually, over time. Impacts on staffing would be felt by the City Clerk's office, code enforcement and
building departments. Modifications or enhancements to existing software may also be required to handle
the volume of data this activity would generate.
Staff requests feedback from Council on proactive. enforcement priorities and rental licensing so that we
can begin planning our 2006 budget proposals. Implementing proactive code enforcement in 2006 would
have the following budget impact:
Salary/benefits for 1.5 additional staff
Vehicle
Misc. hard assets (equip./computer/legal)
$86,000 (annual)
19,000 (depreciated over 5 yrs)
20,000 (variable cost)
Community Affairs and Parks Committee
March 15, 2005
Present:
Joe Duffie, Chair, Joan Hernandez, Dennis Robertson
Rhonda Berry, Peter Beckwith, Jack Pace, Steve Lancaster, Kathy Stetson, Nora
Gierloff, Moira Bradshaw, Derek Speck, Lucy Lauterbach
1. Update on Code Enforcement Kathy gave a report on code enforcement issues for the past
year. The highest numbers of complaints were received in the following categories: building,
trash and vehicles. Kathy explained that Building Department violations have been incorporated
in to the tracking system used for zoning and nuisance code violations, making follow up easier.
She showed before and after picture~'of several major code violation cases which culminated in
property being cleaned up and illegal uses and derelict buildings removed. Forty-eight cases
from 1999-:2003 were also closed and three hundred and twenty new cases were opened and
investigated in 2004. Kathy concluded by referring to the new International Property
Maintenance Code, regulations for vehicle parking and storage, and tax lien ordinances as
valuable tools for Code Enforcement to use. Information.
2. Hearine Examiner Services The city currently contract with the City of Renton for Hearing
Examiner Services. The City of Seattle has submitted a proposal to provide those services for us,
and it appears that proposal holds several advantages for Tukwila. The Seattle examiner costs
$70/hour compared to the Renton examiner cost of$100/hour. Seattle is also willing to work
evenings and weekends, which Renton would not do. Seattle will also hold hearings in Tukwila,
another advantage over current practice. The committee members supported the change.
Recommend interlocal aereement to COW.
",1/ 3. Usine Code Enforcement to Improve Housine Stock As a follow on to materials provided
;;" for the City Council retreat, DCD staff proposed options for improving the housing stock in
. Tukwila. The first decision the Council will make is whether to be pro-active or re-active in code
enforcement. If the city is pro-active another decision will be which issues are most important to
focus on, and whether the focus should be on one or two issues, or instead on cleaning up one
geographic area for several issues.
The City of Sea Tac has been pro-active in addressing some basic code violations. On other
issues they are reactive. Tukwila is now reactive on all code violations, with properties being
investigated only after a complaint is received. Kathy said that approach has resulted in
addressing an issue at one house, while houses on both sides of that house may have the same
violation, but not be the source of a complaint.
The committee supported a more pro-active approach, though Joan hoped to use data from the
housing study to substantiate where there are problems with the housing stock. Dennis said he
would focus on trash and vehicles for both residential areas and multi-family units. He would
like to focus on cleaning up deteriorated and poorly maintained apartments. The committee
talked about joining forces with the police effort to clean up the area around S. 144th/Tukwila
International Boulevard (TIB).
EXHIBIT B-2
Community Affairs and Parks Committee
March 15,2005
A second decision is whether the city should require a business license for multi-family and
accessory dwelling units. Dennis thought there was not a council consensus on this issue, though
he and Joe supported it and Joan would like more infonnation on it. Kathy reported being
allowed in one apartment unit with obvious health and safety violations. Mandatory inspections
of-apartment units is also an option that could come with licensing, though the legality of that is
unclear. Refer issue to COW.
4. Proposed code amendments Th~; committee considered ten draft code amendments. Staff
had listed options, and included recommendations on each amendment. Because cities are
required by State law to accept manufactured homes beginning July 1 st this year, City standards
need to be e'stablished.. Nora said manufactured homes come in a range of quality, from very
basic trailer types to homes hard to distinguish from stick-built homes. Staff had written changes
to the single family dwelling code that manufactured homes would need to follow, and the
recorrimendations would lead to a higher quality manufactured home. The committee largely
followed the staff recommendations. Committee members had some questions about appropriate
requirements for condo conversions and which requirements might be appropriate, and on
whether a dog kennel was appropriate in the urban center. Refer issues to Plannin2:
Commission.
5. Sin2:le Family Nei2hborhood Housin2: Options Moira said most developments for single
family homes put in a standard home with a garage in front. The Comprehensive Plan
encourages a range of housing types. Some options include cottage housing, where small homes
are clustered around a common green, with parking in the back or on the sides, and porches
facing one another. There is an opportunity for this type of housing in a demonstration project in
the city, though an ordinance would need to be passed to allow that. The committee supported
cottage housing on a demonstration proj ect basis. Return to Committee with suecific
recommendations for allowint! demonstration pro1ects.
6. Aerial survey DCD has budgeted an aerial survey of the entire city and is eager to proceed
with that survey before the trees leaf out any more than they already have. The photos will be
used to update the city GIS (geographic infonnation system). Funding comes from both the DCD
and Public Works budgets. Recommend contract for aerial photo2rauhy to Re2ular Meetint!.
Minutes by L. Lauterbach
?~U - Committee chair approval
.
City of SeaTac
Proactive Vs. Reactive Complaints
F or All Property (Residential and Conlmercial)
Updated 2/22/05
Proactive
Improperly disposed garbage
Reactive
Work without permits (Proactive by building
ins ectors
Substandard housin -minor
* Noise
* Minor residential arkin
* Fences
* Non-domestic animals
* Residential rental business license
Metal cano structures
Residential cargo containers
Dan erous buildin s
Attractive nuisances
Ino erableFunk vehicles
Over rown ve etation
Discarded items
Graffiti
Ma'or residential arkin see note below
Commercial cargo containers
Si ns
Commercial business license
Home occu ation-business license
Commercial arkin
Substandard housin -ma'or
Tent/canopy structures
. Appearance of newness
. More than one canopy in front yard
. Tent structure in front yard
. No primary residence
. Exceeds 15' in height
* Wait for com
Tent/canopy structures
. More than three tent/canopies on one lot
. Canopy located in front yard setback
. Canopy in front yard without neighbor
. approval
. Closer than 3' to side property line
. Exceeding lot coverage limitations
. Fabric/material not flame retardant
. Color of tent or canopy
. Structure not anchored per manufacture's
specifications
· Structure used for other than stora e
laint-- ive verbal warnin
Note: A major residential parking violation is one that noticeably stands out as an eyesore.
This typically means more than two cars parked on a dirt or grass surface. However, it could
consist of only two vehicles if the yard is marked with tire tracks.
EXHIBIT C
CITY OF TUKWILA
MEMORANDUM
1D:
Kathy Stetson
FROM:
Peter Beckwith, Assistant City Attorney
DATE:
April 5, 2005
RE:
Legal Issues Related to Regulating Rental-Housing Units
I. ISSUE.
The City is currently evaluating different proposals for regulating rental-housing units in
Tukwila with the goal of improving the housing stock. The City Attorney's office researched
legal issues that may arise in pursuing different options.
II. LEGAL ANALYSIS.
A. Requiring a Rental License.
Cities may require rental-housing units to obtain a rental license. This authority is
granted pursuant to RCW 35A.11.020, which allows cities to adopt and enforce ordinances that
relate to and regulate municipal affairs. Specifically, cities may regulate the ownership, .
maintenance, protection, restoration, regulation, use, leasing, and disposition of real property of
all kinds within the limits of the Constitution. fd Regulation authority is also granted pursuant
to the Washington State Constitution Art. 11 911, which allows cities to regulate through their
police powers. Therefore, Tukwila may regulate rental-housing units by requiring the landlord
to obtain a license.
B. Charging a Fee for the License.
A city may charge a fee for the administrative costs of regulating rental-housing units.
Margola Associates v. City of Seattle, 121 Wn.2d 625, 634, 854 P.2d 23 (1993). However, fees
C:\DOCUME-I \Kathy-S\LOCALS-I \Temp\MEOOOO-l.DOClkasl04/05/05
EXHIBIT D
charged that do not relate to the cost of regulating rental-housing units are classified as a tax, and
unless some taxing authority exists, the fees are unlawful. ld. at 634-35. For example, the
Court has found that a fee imposed on apartment building owners is unlawful if part of the fee is
used to fund housing code inspections of buildings that are not used as apartments. ld. at 640.
As a rule of thumb, when determining the amount for a license it should be considered that a fee
constitutes a tax rather than a regulatory fee when those paying the fee are not directly benefited
by the services funded by the fee. Id.
C. 'Attaching Conditions to the License.
Conditions may be attached to a rental license so long as the conditions do not infringe on
a constitutionally protected right. A condition may be challenged either as an unconstitutional
taking or as a violation of substantive due process. Id. at 643. To avoid a takings claim, the City
needs to show that the condition merely safeguards the public health, safety, and welfare and that
the condition is not to provide an affirmative public benefit or to infringe on a fundamental
attribute of ownership. Id. at 645. To avoid a substantive due process claim, the City needs to
show that the condition is aimed at achieving a legitimate public purpose; 2) the condition is
reasonably necessary to achieve that purpose; and 3) the condition is not unduly oppressive to
the landlord. Id 649. As the above analysis is merely a simple overview of well-developed
constitutional case law, any conditions placed on a license should be reviewed by the City
Attorney's office prior to being implemented.
D. Enforcing the License.
Cities may enforce a rental license in the same way they lawfully enforce their municipal
code. For Tukwila, the code enforcement officer is charged with the responsibility of enforcing
the provisions of the TMC. TMC. 8.45.040(A).
-2-
C:\DOCUME-l \Kathy-S\LOCALS-l \Temp\MEOOOO-l.DOClkasf04/05/05
: \ ~
E. Inspecting the Inside of a Rental-Housing Unit.
A rental-housing unit may be searched for a housing code violation if the renter consents
to the search. City of Seattle v. McCready, 124 Wn.2d 300, 305, 877 P.2d 686 (1994). If the
renter does not consent, but the landlord consents, the landlord may use his or her authority
under the Landlord Tenant Act, the "right of entry" statute RCW 59.18.150 to allow for a search
of the premises. Any information obtained in the search may then be used against the landlord.
City of Seattle, 124 Wn.2d at 305. However, a warrant is required to search a rental-housing unit
for a housing code violation if- the renter and landlord do not consent. Columbia Basin
Apartment Association v. Pasco, 268 F.3d 791, 805 (2001).
Unfortunately, as the law stands, it is difficult for the City to obtain a warrant for a
housing code violation. A municipal court, even with probable cause, may only issue a warrant
for a housing code violation that constitutes a crime and not for a violation that only constitutes a
civil infraction. City of Seattle, 124 Wn.2d at 310. It appears that currently, the Superior Court
does not have jurisdiction either to issue a warrant for housing code violations. In City of Seattle
v. McCready, 123 Wn.2d 260, 281, 868 P.2d 134 (1994) (the first of two cases with the same
name dealing with Seattle's housing code regulations), the Washington State Supreme Court
invalidated warrants issued by the Superior Court for housing code violations based on the
Superior Court's lack of jurisdiction. Therefore, it appears that the City cannot obtain a warrant
for a housing code violation that constitutes only a civil infraction.
It is the City Attorney's understanding that the City of Pasco is currently litigating
whether the Landlord Tenant Act, the "right of entry" statute, RCW 59.18.150, or any other
statute for that matter, provides the requisite authority for a city to require a landlord to inspect a
rental-housing unit and if necessary, require the landlord to obtain a court order to enter into a
-3-
C:\DOCUME-l \Kathy-S\LOCALS-I \ Temp\MEOOOO-I.DOC/kasJ04/05/05
non-consenting renter's housing unit. It is hoped that the Pasco case will resolve the procedure
for how a city can enforce inspections of the inside of rental-housing units.
The above analysis also applies to vacant rental-housing units. The U.S. Supreme Court
has stated that entry, without consent, upon the portions of commercial premises, which are not
open to the public, may only be compelled through prosecution or physical force within the
framework of a warrant procedure. See v. City of Seattle, 387 U.S. 541, 546 (1967). However,
as a renter is not occupying the rental-housing unit, it may be possible to require the landlord to
inspect the inside of the-vacant unit in order to obtain a rental license. It is hoped that the Pasco
case will also shed light on this issue as well.
III. ANOTHER OPTION TO CONSIDER.
Given the legal constraints relative to entry into rental-housing units, a phased approach
may be a viable option. Under this theory, the City could immediately begin to focus on the
exterior of rental-housing units while waiting until the Pasco case has finished the appellate
process to develop alternatives for interior inspections. I have attached a draft code relative to
property maintenance. If this approach is determined to be desirable, our office could look at
adopting this code to regulate rental-housing units.
If additional legal issues arise during the course of evaluating the different proposals for
regulating rental-housing units, please let us know.
-4-
C:\DOCUME-l \Kathy-S\LOCALS-I \Temp\MEOOOO-l.DOClkasf04/05/05
Rental Housing Matrix Exhibit E
Rental Housing Matrix
f/)
Q)
Q)
u.
f/)
....
s:::
Q)
E
E
o
u
x
'C
ro
E
rn
c:
'en
~
o
..c:
CO
......
c:
Q)
a:::
I
i
~ml
O"tJ
.J: 0
~o
('0.
f/)
s:::
"tJ 0
Q) ~!
a.. O!
::s Q) I
C"c.
Q) f/)
a:: s:::
f/) ('0.
f/) (1)
(1) tn
s::: s:::
f/) (1)
::s 0
m:::i~
!
i
I
I
I
!
c
o
~
~
"tJ
f/)
.t:
::s
..,
!
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
1m
Ie
I
ffi j ~ ~ ..(/) Q) ~ rn-
E g- p- c: -t:..c: Q) c: 19
...... Q) "0 Q) m ~ -0 ~ ::: ..c: 'C c:
ffi 'S c: ~ ..c: ~ .~ 0 m Q) 'g. ~
E c-~~ Q c:"o ~O-S; Q) 0
Q) ~ oJ oJ Q) rn ~ .Q ;> ~ '+-
~ ~ :: .Q (/) E .~ 0 E 0 Q) en
Co Q) Q) -"0 1:: ..c: Q) := ...... .Q Q)
E (/) rn ~ Q) m ...... ..c: c: (/) en
.- c: L... 0 > Co Q). ...... .- .m .~ c:Q)
.9 ~ ~ N .~ <( (5 .9 .~ Q) ;>
1"0 := en ~ Q) E ~ rn Q) .~ c: ~
2 ~ co m ~ e Q) ,~ ~ ::: ~ ~
Co Q) "C ~ '0 ~ ..c: -e .. c: Q) Q)
IEC:Q)C:C:- ......oQ)Q)a:::c:.
Q) ,- ~ m ~ ~ U u en .- en
~~L...Jo~roUij;:~(5~:g
<( .Q .E .~ 0 .Q ~ <( 0 Q. c: .Q ~
~
c
o
....
c
Go)
10::
CI)
::J
~
c::
.E
t:
~
'cj
~
s
~
m
Q)
<'
o
o
LO
C"')
Y7
~
~.E
Q)en~:r: co
,~Q) "0 ~ .9 '0 0
~ ~ g!b "0 en......
~ ~ ~ '00 Q) ~ 5 ~
Q)o ~ Jg ~ Q) 'S t5 1:5
~ U) c: .~ c.. g Q) -5
~~~Q)E L...Q.c:
~ ._ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0
o.~:=Q)U m-U
(5 .Q E en ~ . CJ) -L... ~
C:Q)~ffi(l)E:JQ)m
o U Q) U rn ~ 0 t5 _(/)
o 0 0>:.:J ~ rn <( '61:::>
-c: roO Q)O
-r-= ill 'en N E Q. M =~ <(
o
~
a..
C"')
o
o
N
~
.E
"C >. en
Q) := c:
E E ,2
It ~ 1:5
m ...!. Q)o.
o.~ .
IQ)~(/)~
I.,.... E c: ==
'-' .- E
~ (/) 0 m
.-...... Z '+-
LL.... ~ . ~
~ ~~ g'
>- .~ 5 'en
ro Q)
......
c: 0>
Q)
L... c:
ro en 'w
Q) rn
L... :.e .~
.E Q)"o ~
vi a. ~ 'E
Q) 0 u
>- ~ c: ~
0.._
~
c5
C'\S
t-
C'\S
Go)
en
CI)
::J
~
(j
.E
co
Q)
CI)
'c3
;i
s
s
i" :~-~
; c: Y7
i !~_
i : ~ 0
i>- I ~ E
lo~ '0 ~
10 E
IN '6'c
I I'- ! or- ,-
1Y7 iY7 E
j i"O en
!e c: ~ Q)
i 1.- ro Q) Q)
~ I !~ rnro :Q~~
o i i U .~ :.;:::; .2 ...... (/)
U I I t5 ;g ffi Q) .~ ~
......Q) I I' ~ ~ ...... CJ) m .-
I (/) c:"CE
Q) I' I E .Q .Q.?=- Q) .- (l)
~ i I~~~~ ~~Q.
:5 ~ I , ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ .9 'a>
...... "EI c: ~ ::n Q) ~ ~ "0 ~
E ~I IE ~ ~ ~ g E .~ ~ ._~
~ ~ I 1- Q) .- Q. ro - g.2
~ 's I <( ~ E E .~ <( ~ 2 E
ill ~I I-r-= 5 ~ 8 ~ N Co ~ .g
~---.---_._--._--------
!
i
I
I
I
I
I
C"')
<D
rn
ro
a..
co
......
c:
~
co
"E
Q)
~
=ro ro
- (/) .. CJ)
~'-g~:g
>-~>-~
---
CI)
::J
~~
;$ co ~
>E:~
_~ o.~
... t) c
E.EGo)
O;iQ.
(,,) S C.
~s~
CI)
::J
~
.t:::
.CI)
c:
Q)
2:
.E
;i
S
S
rn
(1)
(1)
u.
.?:- 0 +
-"'00 0)
~ C 0 .~
"'0 roN- "'0
.:; en Y7 2 en ==
>..- 0 ,- :!:::J:!::
== "'0 "'0 (j) C C .c C
E ,~ C a>:J :J ~ :J
roenoenN ~~Q5
L1- a> 0 5-;0 00 0..
~-g-g..c:a>oEoo
0)- C ~c...o ~o~
.~ g;: :J 'r"" 0 N I.{)
(f);'::"0.90Y7MY7Y7
0) >.
c ro
~ E ~ 0..
- >.'w en
cOena> :J c>.
-c ~ ~ en..c: a> >. en . co a>
~ a> (1) a> r- ~ 03 en O)~ _
UI"V'OC .~>a>ro--,
u... c 'w ~ :J 'w 0 - ~
.2:' . ro :J a5 0.. en 0 "'9- ~ ~
.- en C .c E "7"'1 (1) ~ "" \.J ~
U en :0 = c: ~ 0.. ~ 'co 0
(1)~o.9~ro~ca>o..(1)
..c: 0 _'::; ,n ro .Q en 'E ..c:
~ ~ (1) -C -':> ~ en -' ~
..c: o....c: 0 g +:: a> 2 ro ~ ~
~ a> ~ +:: ~ 0 g 'u (1) en 0
;: :5 -g ~ =(1) ~ ,~ ~ Co ~ ~
~ ~ 0) en en a. c....- en ro ;:
o 5 ffi '(5) a5 a> E ~ ~ ~ a>
c...c ..c: ~ 0 ~ 0 ..c: .- ..c C
(f) ro 0= = ro 0~L1-~ 0
J!!
s::
(1)
E
E
o
u
x
'C
ro
E
0)
C
'w
:J
o
..c:
ro
~
C
a>
IX
('.
.c 0
o CD
.c1:5
~8
en .9 C ro
~ 1:5 .Q;e a> ~
I C a> 1:5 O).~ c en a>
.~ 1;) 'w - E ~ C a> 0 en 0 ;:
(' I ~:J ro :J >. en .- ..c: ,- 1:5 ~ ;>
'ct+=.c'Eentc~~t5ro~Oc
o ,Q c ~ a> a> a> .- 0 ~ a> 'E ""
.21~ 8. ~ ~ Co e g ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~ ~
..... c..:J 0 <( en c.. ro :!: ~ .- ~ ro E a> C
o I ~ "'0 +:: ..~ E C U .9 "'0 .9 E ...... g. g
CD ,- a> ro a> t a> 0 a> 0 ~ c ," ()
~I- .~ ,~ en a> 0 'E ~ a> .~ a> a> '0 ~ a>
tn I.~ :J c... C c.. "'0 ,- ~ c.. :J c.. C c.. C 0..
s:::!::O'"c..~ecro>.engen;:c..roen
_ i E ~ ro = c.. ~ E .c .~ ~ E 0 ro 0 ,~
o Ii
rn ~I=
(1) tn ~
s:: s::.E
rn CD - en
:s .~ ~ ~
[D..J>-:J
I en-
E~
, "S _ ~ ;:
I roO(f)-5
I (l.c r-
! . 0 .
Iz U5 ~ g B
:E u;-o~
I' ~ '0 ~ 5-.r-::m
en c..O"r""E
Ie -e cu c.. '.-
,- :J (1) cu x en
':'::.cc ea>
c. :J c..c: c...c
I 0 (f) .- :!:: c..
:J:_~;: roB
1:5
CD
-
:s
tr
CD
0::
s::
o
~
~
1:5
rn
'i:
:s
.,
E
Q
(,)
t::
E
C/)
'S
~
g.
..t:
s:
~
~
en!
c!
'w i
:Ji
01
..c:i
ro!
'EI i
~I I
~i ,',
OJ
111 I I
I~I ! I I !II
I (1) 'I Ii! ! I i
I.~ I II III
I ~ I I I C/) I I I ~I
'~~Ii I :.~ I C/) nl. 'I' 8)~'r-;:
en, I i<1> ~ ~ ~.
c' I ':t;:: ctll t::: Q
~ . ~(,) ::J C/)......;
= ICI) Q)~Q~(,)
_ ::J~-~.gQ<1>
o I cU ~I~ ~ D> ~ ~
,en (.) lit::: <1>::J \..; Q
I E I~ ~I~ ~ e ~ ~
j-""IQ)!-Q::J......
1.8 '. ~, ~I':-:;I E .Q Q ~
len !~i~i~i~~,.Q Q
I.~ I!~II~I ~I.~II~I.~ ~
I~I I~!~ ~ ~'~I~ ~
!2i " i 'I
I c, I
I a> Iii
It I ! ! II
1.-1 I 1
1]11[.
en H-i Z I :::!
I~I I I~I <(Iu: 1:5
181 1~!~(3I~I~:J 0 ~
I "'0 I I ~-I- I a> ro i 0 U ~
C CI,culro ~Iu ~ (l.
I C1J! ! OE ::,"'0 E ..c: ~ --
en' I ,en,C ~ ~:J ~
I~I. 1~11~121~'1 el~~'O
!~! 10 ~Jo,o Blo ~
I~I \BI61~BI~lu,~
'<;t
a>
0)
co
(l.