|
The 2006 HBAV
Legislative package has been introduced to the Virginia
General Assembly and has begun its journey through the state
legislative process. Listed below are those measures the HBAV
Legislative Committee crafted and approved as legislative
priorities for this session of the state legislature. Each is
followed with status in the process.
HOUSE BILL 558, by
Delegate Glenn Oder - Would
provide that no cause of action for breach of warranty shall
be commenced on or after January 1, 2007, unless a written
statement by the claimant or his agent, attorney or
representative, of the nature of the alleged defect has been
to the sent to the declarant, by registered or certified mail,
at his last known address, as reflected in the records of the
Real Estate Board, more than six months prior to the
commencement of the action giving the declarant an opportunity
to cure the alleged defect within a reasonable time. The bill
provides that sending the required notice shall toll the
statute of limitations for commencing a breach of warranty
action for a period not to exceed six months. The bill also
contains technical amendments.
In the 2002 Session
of the Virginia General Assembly, legislation was passed that
amended the Virginia Implied Warranty Statute that applies to
new dwellings, except condominiums or condominium units, to
require home builders with a "notice of construction defects"
and an "opportunity to cure" the defect prior to the
commencement of a warranty claim by a new home
buyer.
House Bill 558 would
apply a "notice of construction defect" and an "opportunity to
cure" provision to Section 55-79.79 (c) of the Virginia
Condominium Act. The failure to include condominiums in the
2002 legislation was an oversight.
Much of the
construction defect litigation that has occurred outside of
Virginia in recent years has focused on condominiums or
condominium units. While there has been little construction
defect litigation in Virginia, the housing industry supports
providing the builders of condominiums in Virginia with the
same opportunity for "notice of construction defects" and the
same "opportunity to cure" the defect prior to the
commencement of a warranty claim as is applicable to other
newly constructed dwelling units in Virginia.
House Bill 558 has
been assigned to and approved by the House General Laws
Subcommittee on Housing and should be before the full
Committee next Tuesday morning.
HOUSE BILL 919, by
Delegate Glenn Oder - Would
modify the timing for transfer of easements from a
developer to a franchised cable television operator. Existing
language that refers to conveyance by reference on the final
plat is amended to require conveyance within 30 days after a
written request by the cable operator.
In the 2004
Session of the Virginia General Assembly, a measure was passed
(HB 715) that has required the location of franchised cable
and public service corporation easements to be displayed and
conveyed by reference on the final plat. The measure was
designed to level the playing field, with respect to the
location of easements, between public service corporations and
cable franchise operators and was not opposed by HBAV. As a
result of the passage of HB 715, several localities have
interpreted the measure to require the location of such
easements be determined prior to approval of a final plat. In
other words, the "cart" has been placed before the
"horse".
Prior to the passage
of House Bill 715 in 2004, the location of such easements were
established and recorded after the approval of final plats by
localities. Public service corporations and franchise cable
operators, who provide the design layout of their service to
new developments, prefer to design their service layout after
final plat approval, since development designs often change
between preliminary plat approval and final plat approval. Dry
utility providers prefer to provide one service design to land
developers rather than two, should a development design change
between preliminary plat approval and final plat approval.
The measure repeals
most the provisions of HB 715, and will require a developer to
provide an easement to a cable television operator, upon
written request, within 30 days after conveying an easement,
which will permit electric or telephone service to be
furnished to a subdivision.
House Bill 919 has
been assigned to the House Counties, Cities and Towns
Committee.
HOUSE BILL 684, by
Delegate Tom Rust -
Provides definitions of terms in the Erosion and Sediment
Control and Stormwater Management Acts that clarify what are
acceptable flow rates from storm runoff at sites where land
development projects are occurring.
The measure is
intended to address stormwater issues raised by development
and redevelopment in urban and urbanizing areas of the
Commonwealth. The Department of Conservation and recreation
has promulgated regulations designed to protect streams from
erosion and flooding that frequently results from land
development. But many streams in such areas are already eroded
or eroding and considered inadequate under the DCR
regulations. What is needed is an on-site remedy that will
provide for real environmental protection of downstream
receiving channels. Such a remedy will better protect the
environment and reduce sprawl by facilitating development and
redevelopment in urban and urbanizing areas of
Virginia.
House Bill 684 will
amend the erosion and sediment control and stormwater
management laws to provide that stormwater management
facilities will satisfy those laws and their implementing
regulations if they are designed (i) to detain the water
quality volume and release it over 48 hours, (ii) to detain
and release over a 24-hour period the expected rainfall
resulting from the 1-year 24-hour storm, and (iii) reduce the
allowable peak flow rate resulting from the 1.5, 2 and
10-year, 24 hour storms to a level that is less than or equal
to the peak flow rate from the site assuming it was in a good
forested condition, achieved through multiplication of the
forested peak flow rate by a reduction factor that is equal to
the runoff volume from the site when it was in a good forested
condition divided by the runoff volume from the site in its
proposed condition. Use of this stringent and expensive
alternative will be voluntary.
We are pleased to
report that the bill is supported by the Department of
Conservation and Recreation, as well as the Chesapeake Bay
Foundation and the Virginia Conservation Network. This is one
of those rare bills that is truly good for both the
environment and economic development because it will not only
protect and improve streams that are already distressed but
allow for development in urban and urbanizing areas, thus
relieving the pressure to develop in suburban and rural
areas... that is sprawl.
House Bill 684 has
been approved by the House Agriculture, Chesapeake and Natural
Resources Committee and a full 100-member House of
Delegates and awaits action by the Senate Agriculture,
Conservation and Natural Resources Committee.
HOUSE BILL 1375, by
Delegate Bob Hull -
Requires certain preliminary plats to be forwarded to the
appropriate state agency for review within five days of
receipt by the locality.
Among the many
frustrations home builders and land developers have in
Virginia is the long period of time it takes for localities to
review and approve or deny applications for preliminary
subdivision plans. While Section 15.2-2260 of the Code of
Virginia allows localities to require the submission of a
preliminary subdivision plat, the same section also requires
localities to complete action on the preliminary plat within
60 days of submission. Yet, such review and final approval by
localities and state agencies often takes many, many months
all across Virginia.
Localities report
that some of their delay in the review and approval or denial
of preliminary subdivision plans has been the failure of state
agencies to conduct their necessary reviews in a timely
manner. Section 15.2-2260 requires state agencies, including
VDOT, to complete their review within forty-five (45) days of
receipt of the subdivision preliminary plat. In follow-up
discussions with VDOT and other state agencies on their
failure to complete timely review of subdivision preliminary
plans, they report that they often do not receive them
until 40 to 50 days after submission to the
locality.
The STATE AGENCY
REVIEW OF SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT legislation will simply
require a locality that accepts a preliminary subdivision plat
for review to forward the same to the necessary state
agencies, including VDOT, within five days of receipt of the
submission.
House Bill 1375 has
been amended and approved by the House Counties, Cities and
Towns Committee. By Committee Amendment, the five-day
requirements were extended to ten days.
|
