The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutB- 4 Public Nuisance Appeal for Property located at 227 N. Azusa Ave.AGENDA ITEM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: ROY E. BRUCKNER, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR VIA: RICK COLE, CITY MANAGER AAr DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2003 SUBJECT: PUBLIC NUISANCE APPEAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 227 N. AZUSA AVE. (UNPERMITTED STORAGE YARD) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended City Council conduct a public nuisance appeal hearing pursuant to Section 14-419 Azusa Municipal Code, and adopt a Resolution denying the appeal with direction to the City Attorney to seek an Injunction against unlawful uses and structures on the property. BACKGROUND This appeal is brought by the Property Owner(s) of record for the property located at 227 N. Azusa Avenue, by Mr. John and Margaret Urquiza, who reside at 16361 E. San Bernardino Road, Covina, CA 91722. The appeal was continued from the January 21, 2003 council meeting. The property at 227 N. Azusa Ave. was declared a Public Nuisance on May 8, 2002, due to unpermitted construction of an 8 foot high plywood fence across the property, unlawful storage of vehicles and equipment on unpaved surfaces, and failure to obtain a Precise Plan of Design for intensification of land use involving the transition of a vacant unimproved property to a property used for parking and storage of vehicles, equipment, and materials largely associated with "MJ Roofing" owned by Mr. John Urquiza. This matter was brought before the City Council previously on June 1, 2002, at which time the City Council asked the property owner(s) to comply within 60 days. However, at that time the Council did not formally vote on the matter, or provide written notice denying or approving the applicant's appeal, or advise the appellant of his right to Judicial Review under 1094.6 California Code of Civil Procedure as required in Section 14-420 Azusa Municipal Code. Following the appellant's failure to comply with the City Council request for compliance, staff was required to provide a new Administrative Hearing to the property owner(s) and once again afford them the opportunity to appeal. The second Administrative Hearing was held on December 1 1, 2002, at which the Administrative Hearing Officer once again declared several conditions on the property a Public Nuisance (copy attached). The appeal submitted by the property owner(s) does not provide specific reasons why the decision of the Administrative Hearing Officer was in error and staff cannot address the grounds for appeal in this matter. The appellants simply state that they want to meet once again with the City Council and explain why parts of the decision made on December 1 I, 2002 are not correct. The appellant's property is currently Zoned "C-2" (Restricted Commercial) which allows the owner's to develop a parking garage, or surface parking lot for the parking of vehicles with an approved Precise Plan of Design, however, the "C-2" Zone does not allow building materials or storage [Ref. "Appendix A", §88-2065 Azusa Zoning Code (Page(s) CD88:197 &CD88:193 respectively]. The property owners have also installed an 8 foot high plywood fence across the property interior which bisects the property, however, the fence does not appear to violate §88-645 since the location of the fence does not qualify it as a perimeter or lot line fence, and is not located in a required "front yard" since the property is not improved with a building [Ref. § 88-630 Azusa Zoning Code]. The fence does, however, violate § 106.2 California Building Code (1998 Edition) as adopted in § 14-1 Azusa Municipal Code which requires a building permit for all fences over 6 feet in height, and would be regulated under Precise Plan of Design, if or when a legal use of the property is formally proposed. In deliberating the appeal in this case, Council should consider long term goals and investments made in the Azusa Avenue corridor, and what impact the proliferation of contractor storage yards, or use of unimproved property will have on revitalization efforts. In deciding this issue, the City Council should also consider the possible effect such yards will have on encouraging new retail commercial development along this highly visible corridor. Accordingly, staff recommends that the Declaration of Public Nuisance be sustained and the appeal be denied. Staff further recommends that the City Council authorize the City Attorney to seek both a Temporary and Permanent Injunction against the property owners for maintaining a public nuisance if it is not abated by the property owners within thirty (30) days of adoption of a Resolution denying the appeal as provided for in § 88-75 Azusa Municipal Code, and that a Declaration of Substandard Property be immediately recorded against the property. Further, that the costs of abatement including all Attorney's Fees, court costs, and staff time be charged to the property owner(s) pursuant to Section 14-421 Azusa Municipal Code. PA I FISCAL IMPACT: To date staff time amounts to approximately $500.00, if litigated legal costs are estimated at $5,000 all of which are recoverable as an abatement cost and lien against the property. The following photographs are presented for council review: 3 I RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION AND ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE DECEMBER 11, 2002 NUISANCE DETERMINATION AND ABATEMENT ORDER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 227 N. AZUSA AVENUE (ASSESSOR PARCEL NO. 8611-027-006) NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA, CALIFORNIA, DOES FIND AND DECLARE THAT: SECTION 1. Findin¢s. The City Council of the City of Azusa hereby finds and determines as follows: 1. On June 1, 2002, the City Council of the City of Azusa ("City Council") conducted a public hearing concerning certain nuisance conditions on property located at 227 N. Azusa Avenue (Assessor Parcel No. 8611-027-006) ("Subject Property') and ordered their abatement within sixty (60) days. 2. Since the nuisance conditions were not abated within 60 days, abatement proceedings were recommenced for the Subject Property for the purpose of abating certain public nuisance conditions in accordance with the provisions of the Azusa Municipal Code, Section 14-411 et seq. 3. A list of the nuisance conditions is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" to this resolution. 4. On December 11, 2002, in accordance with Azusa Municipal Code, Section 14-415, written notice of the nuisance conditions, a description of the property involved and the designation of the time and place of a hearing before an Administrative Hearing Officer to determine whether such conditions constitute a nuisance and proposed abatement actions was provided to the owners of the Subject Property. 5. On December 11, 2002, a duly noticed hearing was held before an Administrative Hearing Officer at which time all persons wishing to testify were heard, including the property owners, and the Administrative Hearing Officer issued a notice declaring that a public nuisance exists on the Subject Property and ordering its abatement. i 6. A copy of the Administrative Hearing Officer's notice of decision and abatement order is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" to this resolution. 7. In accordance with Section 14-418 of the Azusa Municipal Code, the property owners filed an appeal of the Administrative Hearing Officer's notice and order on December 19, 2002. 8. A copy of the appeal is attached hereto as Exhibit "C" to this resolution. 9. In accordance with Section 14-418 of the Azusa Municipal Code, the matter was set for a de novo hearing before the City Council on January 21, 2003. At the applicant's request, the hearing was continued to February 3, 2003 at which time the property owners/appellants were afforded an opportunity to be heard in connection with the appeal. SECTION 2. Decision and Order of Abatement. The City Council of the City of Azusa hereby finds that the actions taken by the City and the Administrative Hearing Officer were taken in conformity with the provisions of the Azusa Municipal Code. Therefore, the City Council hereby upholds the decision, notice and abatement order of the Administrative Hearing Officer dated December 11, 2002 and orders compliance with such order within thirty (30) days after the mailing of this resolution to the property owners/appellants. SECTION 3. Recordation of Declaration and Failure to Abate Nuisance Conditions. City staff is hereby directed to immediately record a Declaration of Substandard Property against the Subject Property. Pursuant to Azusa Municipal Code, Sections 14-419(d) and 14-421, the City Council also hereby directs City staff to abate the nuisance conditions as reflected in Exhibit "B" and to keep an accounting of the abatement costs should the property owners/appellants fail to abate the nuisance conditions within 30 days. SECTION 4. Authorization to Seek Injunction. The City Attorney is also authorized and directed to seek an injunction to abate and/or prevent the nuisance conditions should these not be abated within 30 days. SECTION 5. Notice of Final Decision. The City Clerk is hereby directed to mail a copy of this resolution and order to the property owners/appellants and any other person requesting such order within five (5) working days of its adoption. Adoption of this resolution is the City Council's final administrative action and order as to the matters contained herein. Pursuant California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, any action to review the decision shall be commenced no later than the 90th day after the date of adoption of this resolution. R PUBWXM\646911 -2-