CC_Minutes_2018_0917 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, September 17, 2018 Page 19 Mayor Roe asked if the City can state there cannot be any storage of vehicles in the right-of-way if the City defines storage, even if it is moveable. Mr. Englund believed it is in code already that nothing can be stored in the right-of-way. 2. Enhancement to 2018 Neighborhood Enhancement Program (NEP) /Proactive Code Enforcement Mr. Englund reviewed the staff report with the Council. He stated using the door hanger for compliance violation notification has been well received and has yield- ed a compliance rate of over 80%. He thought if the City could expand the neighborhood enhancement program to meet resident perception, that Code En- forcement covers the entire City every year, that may be a way to uniformly pro- actively inspect the entire City in a season to address the repeat item where most of them are three years later where the City would be coming back to the same neighborhood. Mr. Englund felt if Code Enforcement was to do the entire City over a season that would reduce a lot of the code compliance cases staff gets on a reactive basis. Code Enforcement would be addressing them before it comes to a level where residents would want to call in to complain. In addition, the City could look at repeat nuisance ordinances and expanding the time frame it is able to be used. Currently it is three violations within a one-year period. A longer time frame may reduce the number of repeat properties the Code Department sees. With the Pro- active through NEP the City does see a higher rate of rental properties with have issues. He stated approximately one percent of the properties in Roseville are rental, but the City has about thirty percent of the code compliance cases are on the one percent rental properties. It is a significant area that has more issues. Mayor Roe asked if there was a financial impact to inspect the whole City. Mr. Englund did not believe there would be in regard to what the EDA currently funds. What may need to happen is the City may need to use an additional sea- sonal inspector for the City building code inspections. That would be funded through community development through building permits. Typically, and histor- ically, the inspector for NEP has been funded by the NEP and the Community Development Department because it was not a position that could be staffed for one purpose year round. Mayor Roe asked if the EDA levies for the NEP mitigation annually, so the levy would be $100,000 annually. Part of this pays for the inspections and part of it pays for the mitigation if the City does an accelerated abatement. Mr. Englund stated that is under a separate fund and the EDA is an existing balance. The City does not levy for that, only for the inspections and the NEP part of it. Councilmember Willmus stated the City has permit fees that are established and directly tied to what that item is that the permit is being pulled for. He asked how