On occasion, there are construction activities associated with development projects that result in complaints to the City by adjacent or nearby residents and/or businesses. The most common complaints received are the generation of excessive dust and noise from construction activities outside expected hours of operation (i.e., starting work too early or going too late). Other recent complaints include concerns regarding the removal of oak trees and concerns whether what is being constructed is correctly following approved plans. The Community Development Department typically receives these complaints directly during regular business hours, or by voicemail outside of regular business hours, but there have also been instances where Councilmembers are directly contacted due to concerns occurring after regular business hours or on weekends.
For the latter types of complaints, oak tree removal is regulated through the City’s Oak Tree Ordinance and the removal of oak trees is an allowed activity if a person obtains an oak tree removal permit and complies with mitigation requirements. In addition, adherence to approved plans is gained through the City’s plan review and approval process and through regular and on-going inspections of construction projects by the City’s construction inspectors.
To control excessive dust from construction activities, development projects are required to adhere to a series of conditions of approval that minimize dust. These conditions are largely based on the PCAPCD’s Rule 228 – Fugitive Dust, and they include, but are not limited to, the preparation of a dust control plan that is approved by the Placer County Air Pollution Control District (PCAPCD), applying water to construction areas, limiting speed limits on unpaved surfaces and using street sweepers. In addition, the PCAPCD can be contacted directly for dust complaints via telephone or their on-line complaint system.
To address noise from construction activities, the City has established a noise policy on all construction projects within or near residential areas which prohibit noise generating construction activities before 7:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m. on weekdays and before 8:00 a.m. or after 7:00 p.m. on weekends. While most contractors willingly adhere to the City’s construction noise guidelines, the limitations have not been adopted by Ordinance and are therefore not enforceable by the Police Department. It should be noted that even if the limitations were adopted by Ordinance, monitoring and enforcing construction hour limitations would likely be considered by the Police Department as not an effective use of a police officer’s time. The Building Department does have the authority to issue a Stop Work Order due to violations of the City’s construction noise guidelines, but the goal is to gain voluntary compliance before resorting to such an extreme measure.
Discussion:
For the majority of the time, the above types of complaints are not considered concerns that rise to the level of being life-threatening or posing significant health and safety concerns that would warrant immediate attention. With limited exceptions, the Code Enforcement Division does not work after regular business hours or on weekends and are thus not available to respond to dust and noise complaints that occur during those times. The Code Enforcement Division consists of a Senior Code Enforcement Officer, a Code Enforcement Officer, a part time Code Enforcement Office and a part time Office Assistant II.
An option to provide coverage after regular business hours and on weekends would be to request the two full-time Code Enforcement officers flex their schedules such that they would alternate weekend coverage and not be on duty for two days during the work week. This option would require meeting and conferring with AFSCME, and is anticipated to adversely impact staff morale. It is also deemed not practical because having only fifty percent of the full time work force for two days during the work week would severely limit the ability to respond to code enforcement complaints during that period. Furthermore, there are inherent safety concerns for a Code Enforcement officer working alone, and there would be periods of time under this approach when a supervisor would also be absent.
A second option would be to have a Code Enforcement Officer available on stand-by after regular business hours and on weekends, but provisions regarding overtime pay/compensatory time off (CTO), standby pay, and call-back pay per the City’s labor agreement with AFSCME would apply, and would result in additional expense. This option would result in a Code Enforcement officer working alone, increasing safety concerns, and would also result in staff working without the assistance of a supervisor.
A third option which would help overcome some of the limitations discussed in the options above, would be to increase staffing to four Code Enforcement Officers, to provide coverage after business hours and weekends. The salary range of a full time Code Enforcement Officer is $60,057 to 82,788, with additional costs for benefits. However, given the infrequency of complaints regarding construction activities, hiring even one additional Code Enforcement Officer to respond to those complaint does not appear to be justified.
Conclusion:
It is staff’s opinion that with the limited resources of only two full time Code Enforcement Officers, providing additional coverage after normal business hours and on weekends is not practicable, and would result in additional costs. Additionally, because the majority of complaints regarding construction activities after hours or on weekends are not considered concerns that rise to the level of being life-threatening or posing significant health and safety concerns that would warrant immediate attention and the overall number of complaints is relatively low, hiring additional Code Enforcement personnel is not justified.
Unless a complaint regarding construction activities after regular business hours or on weekends rises to the level of being life-threatening or posing significant health and safety concerns, responses to those complaints should follow the current model of being attended to the following business day.