The URL can be used to link to this page

00-270ORlG1NAL RESOLUTION Presented By Referred "I Council File # 00 — SRO Green Sheet # � f,�g.'1,Rq _ 1 WIIEREAS, Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement has requested the City 2 Council to hold public heazings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or 3 wrecking and removal of a two-story, wood frame duplex with a detached, one-stall, wood frame gazage 4 and wood shed located on properiy hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Properiy" and commonly 5 known as 294 Chazies Avenue. This property is legally described as follows, to wit: 6 7 Lot 11, Block 22, Robertson and Van Etten's Addition to Saint Paul. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or before November 10, 1999, the following are the now known interested ar responsible parties for the Subject Property: Agnes WaTl, 294 Charles Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55103; c/o Michael R. Davis, 292 Chazles Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55103-2004; Michael R. Davis, 305 Edmund Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55103-2004 WHEREAS, Division of Code Enforcement has served in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code an order identified as an"Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s)" dated January 4, 2000; and WIIEREAS, this order informed the then lrnown interested or responsible parties that the structure located on the Subject Property is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and WIIEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or demolish the structure located on the Subject Properiy by February 3, 2000; and WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declazing this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolition; and WIIEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Division of Code Enforcement requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and WHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legisiative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the public hearings; and CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA oe-ZRo 1 WIIEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City 2 Council on Tuesday, Mazch 7, 2000 to hear testunony and evidence, and after receiving testimony and 3 evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible parties 4 to make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and 5 remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all 6 applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in 7 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of the structure to 8 be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing; and 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, Mazch 22, 2000 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was considered by the Council; now therefore BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the above referenced public hearings, the Saint Paul City Council hereby adopts the following Findings and Order conceming the Subject Property at 294 Chazles Avenue: 1. 2. � 7 � That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined 'm Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45. That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is estimated to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000.00). That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or Building code violations at the Subject Property. That an Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) was sent to the then known responsible parties to correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected. That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placard on the Subject Properiy which declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition. That this building has been routinely monitored by the Citizen Service O�ces, Division of Code Enforcement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings. That the known interested parties and owners are as previously stated in this resolution and that the notification requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled. �'� • The Saint Paul CiTy Council hereby makes the following order: 45 1. The above referenced interested or responsible parties shail make the Subject Property safe and 46 not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and remove its blighting influence 47 on the community by rehabilitating this structure and correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in 48 the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accordance with all applicable 49 codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the stnxcture in 50 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation ar demolition and 51 removal of the structure must be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council 52 Hearing. �� i G I�l A L a�.�� 2 2. ff the above corrective action is not completed within this period of time the Citizen Service 3 Office, Division of Code Enforcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps aze necessary 4 to demolish and remove this structure, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the 5 Subject Properly pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal property or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this tune period. If all personal properry is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shali remove and dispose of such property as provided by law. 4. It is further ordered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to the owners and interested parties in accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Yeas Navs Absen� Benanav Blakev ✓ Bostrom ✓ Coleman Harris Lantrv ✓ Reiter _ � V Adopted by Council: Date Q� S��a-� , Adoption Certified by Council Secretary B y' � �� / •. I: Requested by Department of: Citizen Service Office: Code Enforcement BY �, �Z �--. �- V ��^�-� a'D �� Form Approved by City Attorney By: . � ' Approved by Mayor for Submission to Councii BY: �'/! l�-j"i�'/ Michael R Morehead 266-8439 � TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE 00 -a.�,c GREEN SHEET No 1022 79 ` � � f �,u.�.�,o, d,,,� � m,..,.� ❑ �«� ❑�,�,� ❑.,�.,�.�,�a �„�,�,,,�.� �� ❑ (CLIP ALL �OCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Ciry Council to pass this resolufion which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. The subject properly is located at 294 Charles Avenue. PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB COMMITTEE CML SERVICH CAMMISSION Has this persw�rtn erer worked under a contrac[ torthis departmeM? YES NO Hes this pe�saufirm e�er been a cdy empbyee4 YES NO Does this persoNfirm poasess a s1611 not namallypossessetl by anY �+� city emPloyee? YES NO Is fhis peBOMrm e fargHetl vendaR YES " I� This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chaptex 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chaptex 43 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties known to the Enforcement Officer wexe given an order to repau ox remove the buitding at 294 Charles Avenue by February 3, 2000; and have failed to comply with those orders. �= . ��a��'� The City will elnninate a nuisance. `; : il[ The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to the pxoperry, A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will contmue to blight the community. ',: Ilt '' 111 sounce Nnisance Housing Abatement (��M COSTIREVENUE BUIXikTED (CtRCLE ONEI I ACTIVRYNUMBER 33261 NO "¢ •• G£?;7�t' C�!S^�h �rs��i';,� � ; � .�. �; ,�t:E��. 0 0 -�.�o REPORT Date: Mazch 7, 2000 Time: 10:00 am. Place: Room 330 City Hall 15 West Kellogg Boulevard LEGISLATIVE HEARING Gerry Strathman Legislative Hearing Officer 1. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 783 Como Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Gerry Strathman recommended laying over to the June 6, 2000, Legislative Hearing on the following condirion: the owner pays the vacant buiiding fee by March 15, 2000. 2. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 294 Charles Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Gerry Strathman recommended approval. 3. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 55 Atwater Street. Gerry Strathman recomxnended denying the appeal, but amending the date to remove tke vehicle to April 15, 2000. I.s;� C[ITZEN SERVICE OFFICE FredOwusu, Ciry Clerk Oo-�.�10 DMSION OF PROPERTY CODE ENF'ORCEMEN'f Mrchael R Mo�ehead Proqram.Llanager i CTI'Y OF SAINT PAUL Nuisance Butlding Code Enforcement Norm Coleman, Mayor IS W. KeZloggBlvd 2n. 190 Te1: 651-266-8SS0 SairaPau7,MN.i5102 Faz:6i7-2668426 i February 11, 2000 NOTICE OF PUSLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Citizen Service Office, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Bnforcement Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution ordering the repair or removai of the nuisance building(s) located at: 294 Charles Avenue The City Council has scheduled the date of these heazings as follows: Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, March 7, 2000 City Council Hearing - Wednesday, March 22, 2000 The owners and responsible parties of record aze: Name and Last Known Address Agnes Wall 294 Charles Avenue St. Paul, MN 5�103 Interest Fee Owner c!o Michael R. Davis 292 Charles Avenue St. Paul, MN 55103-2004 Michael R. Davis 305 Edmund Avenue St. Paul, MN 55103-2004 Tamayer Ta�payer oo-a.�o 294 Charles Avenue February 11, 2000 Pa�e 2 The legal descziption of this property is: Lot 11, Block 22, Robertson and Van Etten's Addition to Saint Paul. Division of Code Enforcement has declared this buildin�(s) to constitute a"nuisance" as defined by Legislative Code, Chapter 45. Division of Code Enforcement has issued an order to the then known responsible parties to eliminate this miisance condition by conectina the deficiencies or by xazin� and removin� this buildin�(s). Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains unabated, the community continues to suffer the blighting influence of this property. It is the recommendation of the Division of Code Enforcement that the City Council pass a resolution ordering the responsible parties to either repair, or demolish and remove this building in a timely manner, and failing that, authorize the Aivision of C.ode Enforcement to proceed to demoliYion and removal, and to assess the costs incurred a�ainst the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as taxes. Sincerely, Steve Mc�gne� Steve Magner Vacant Buildings Supervisor Division of Code Enforcement Citizen Service Office SM:mI cc: Frank Bera, Buildin� Inspection and Desi� Meahan Riley, City Attorneys Office Nancy Anderson, Assistant Secretary to the Council Paul Mordarski, PED-Housin� Division ccnph MINLTTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING Tuesday, Mazch 7, 2000 p0 -�4 b Room 330 Courthouse Gerry 5trathman, Legislative Aearing Officer The meeting was called to order at 10:02 a.m. STAFF PRESENT: Mike Kalis, Code Enforcement; Steve Magner, Code En£orcement Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 783 Como Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Steve Magner gave photographs to Gerry Strathman; they were returned at the end of the meeting.) Steve Magner reported this building is a two story dwelling with a gazage and a metal storage shed. It has been vacant since September 1997. An inspection was conducted on 11-24-97, and a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed and photographs were taken. Vacant building fees are due. Real estate taxes aze unpaid in the amount of $2,939.27. The estimated mazket value of the properiy is $75,300. A code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a bond has not been posted. The estimated cost to repair is $40,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. Burton Murdock, owner, appeazed and stated he has a plan to install a new roof. A roofer was too busy to install one last yeaz. He had trouble with squirrels last year. He uses the properiy as part of his business. Mr. Murdock plans to sell the property after the roof is installed. The only thing wrong with the building is the roof, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Murdock responded that is correct. This is a residence, but it is used as part of a business, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Murdock responded his father purchased the property in 1946 and it is used as a storage facility for their plumbing business. It has been rented at various times over the years. The City found out it wasn't rented and has been bothering him ever since. Mr. Strathman asked why the building is a nuisance. Because of the overall condition of the exterior, responded Mr. Magner. There ue concerns about the deterioration of the roof and rodent infestation. If the roof is repaired, wouid that address the nuisance condition, asked 3vlr. Strathman. IvIr. Magner responded the owner would need to obtain a code compliance inspection, post a bond, obtain the permits, and repair all the items. The owner claims the interior is fine, but he is reluctant to let anyone in. Mr. Murdock responded he was never asked. If the owner chooses to leave the building vacant and pays the vacant building fee, is there anythiug that requires him to get a code compliance inspection, asked Mr. Strathman. To obtain a code compliance certificate, responded Mr. Magner, an inspection has to be done. If the building was to oc -a.�o LEGISLATIVE HEARTNG MINUTES OF 3-7-00 Page 2 remain vacant, the inspection would not have to be done. However, the emphasis of the prograzn is to get the properties rehabilitated. The e�cterior violations constitute a nuisance or violation of the law which is subject by this action or cruninal action. The deficiency list includes other exterior violations, such as the eaves, some deterioration on the siding, and the gazage needs painting. Mr. Murdock stated if he is left alone for si�c months, he will be out of the property and it will be sold. Mr. Magner stated Mr. Murdock has been asked repeatedly what his plans aze, and he has given the same answers that he is providing now. Code Enforcement is not disputing that he does not want to do these items, but would like a time line when it will happen. Mr. Strathman stated the owner has the right to leave the building vacant if thax is what he chooses to do as long as he maintains the exterior. Mr. Magner suggested setting up a time frame to obtain a code compliance inspection, obtain a $2,000 bond, which is going to be required to post the permits, make the exterior repairs, and then revisit this issue as a layover. Or the owner could sell the properry. He would need to have the code compliance inspection to sell the property as required by ordinance. IY s cheaper to haue the code compliance inspection done than a truth-in-housing inspection. One or the other document is needed for anyone to live in the properly and to bring the building into compliance. The owner wouid need a pernut to put a roof on the building and do the other repairs. Mr. Strathman asked when the roof will be done. Mr. Murdock responded it may be done in the next 30 to 60 days. Mr. Strathman stated the vacant building fee is due and wiil have to be paid, and the exterior repairs will have to be done. He is not sure that the code compiiance inspection will haue to be done if the owner does not intend to occupy the buiiding, nor is he sure how the building will be sold without the code compliance inspection. Mr. Murdock responded he has no problem with getting a code compliance inspection after the roof is done. He will bring a check in tomorrow to pay the vacant building fee. What would be the problem if he paid the vacant building fee and got the code compliance inspection done at some point in the future, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Magner responded they will not issue a permit for his roof until a bond and code compliance inspection aze done. That is a set policy by the building department. Mr. Magner does not see the reason why the inspection cannot be done. Mr. Murdock responded he does not want an inspector in his home because he does not trust them and he has been lied to before. He should not have to feel guiity because it is vacant. Gerry Strathman recommended this matter be laid over to the June 6, 2000, Legislative Hearing on the following condition: the owner pays the vacant building fee by March 15, 2000. Hopefully, the roof wili be installed in three months, and the building will be ready for sale. Mr. Magner added Mr. Murdock will need to be here on June 6 or send a representative. D o -�'io LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF 3-7-00 Page 3 Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 294 Charles Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Steve Magner gave photographs to Gerry Stratlwiazi.) Steve Magner reported the building has been vacant since April 1998. Five sununary abatement notices have been issued to remove refuse, cut tall grass, and remove snow from the public sidewallc. An inspection was conducted on 12-16-99, and a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed and photographs were taken. Vacant building fees aze due. Real estate ta�tes are unpaid in the amount of $2,219.25. The estimated mazket value of the property is $65,600. A code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a bond has not been posted. The estnnated cost to repair is $25,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. The owner is Agnes Wall. The person in controi of this building is Michael R. Davis. He has disappeared in the last year and is a member of the armed services. Mr. Sirathman asked about the high mazket value of the property. Mr. Magner responded that seems unchazacterisfically high, but the value comes from Rainsey County Taxation. Gerry Strathman recommended approval. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 55 Atwater Street. William Johnson, owner, appeared and stated he was not awaze that there was a law ar code that he could not have a vehicle on his properry. He got into an accident and it runs, but he does not want to drive it in its condition. He would like an additional month to get it repaired. In answer to questions, Mr. Johnson responded the vehicle does not fit in his garage and he will remove it in 30 days, licensed, and operable. Gerty Strathman denied the appeal, but amended the date to repair the vehicle to April 15, 2000. The meeting was adj ourned at 10:31 a.m. rrn ORlG1NAL RESOLUTION Presented By Referred "I Council File # 00 — SRO Green Sheet # � f,�g.'1,Rq _ 1 WIIEREAS, Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement has requested the City 2 Council to hold public heazings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or 3 wrecking and removal of a two-story, wood frame duplex with a detached, one-stall, wood frame gazage 4 and wood shed located on properiy hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Properiy" and commonly 5 known as 294 Chazies Avenue. This property is legally described as follows, to wit: 6 7 Lot 11, Block 22, Robertson and Van Etten's Addition to Saint Paul. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or before November 10, 1999, the following are the now known interested ar responsible parties for the Subject Property: Agnes WaTl, 294 Charles Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55103; c/o Michael R. Davis, 292 Chazles Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55103-2004; Michael R. Davis, 305 Edmund Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55103-2004 WHEREAS, Division of Code Enforcement has served in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code an order identified as an"Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s)" dated January 4, 2000; and WIIEREAS, this order informed the then lrnown interested or responsible parties that the structure located on the Subject Property is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and WIIEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or demolish the structure located on the Subject Properiy by February 3, 2000; and WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declazing this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolition; and WIIEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Division of Code Enforcement requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and WHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legisiative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the public hearings; and CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA oe-ZRo 1 WIIEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City 2 Council on Tuesday, Mazch 7, 2000 to hear testunony and evidence, and after receiving testimony and 3 evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible parties 4 to make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and 5 remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all 6 applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in 7 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of the structure to 8 be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing; and 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, Mazch 22, 2000 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was considered by the Council; now therefore BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the above referenced public hearings, the Saint Paul City Council hereby adopts the following Findings and Order conceming the Subject Property at 294 Chazles Avenue: 1. 2. � 7 � That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined 'm Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45. That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is estimated to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000.00). That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or Building code violations at the Subject Property. That an Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) was sent to the then known responsible parties to correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected. That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placard on the Subject Properiy which declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition. That this building has been routinely monitored by the Citizen Service O�ces, Division of Code Enforcement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings. That the known interested parties and owners are as previously stated in this resolution and that the notification requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled. �'� • The Saint Paul CiTy Council hereby makes the following order: 45 1. The above referenced interested or responsible parties shail make the Subject Property safe and 46 not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and remove its blighting influence 47 on the community by rehabilitating this structure and correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in 48 the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accordance with all applicable 49 codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the stnxcture in 50 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation ar demolition and 51 removal of the structure must be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council 52 Hearing. �� i G I�l A L a�.�� 2 2. ff the above corrective action is not completed within this period of time the Citizen Service 3 Office, Division of Code Enforcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps aze necessary 4 to demolish and remove this structure, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the 5 Subject Properly pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal property or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this tune period. If all personal properry is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shali remove and dispose of such property as provided by law. 4. It is further ordered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to the owners and interested parties in accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Yeas Navs Absen� Benanav Blakev ✓ Bostrom ✓ Coleman Harris Lantrv ✓ Reiter _ � V Adopted by Council: Date Q� S��a-� , Adoption Certified by Council Secretary B y' � �� / •. I: Requested by Department of: Citizen Service Office: Code Enforcement BY �, �Z �--. �- V ��^�-� a'D �� Form Approved by City Attorney By: . � ' Approved by Mayor for Submission to Councii BY: �'/! l�-j"i�'/ Michael R Morehead 266-8439 � TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE 00 -a.�,c GREEN SHEET No 1022 79 ` � � f �,u.�.�,o, d,,,� � m,..,.� ❑ �«� ❑�,�,� ❑.,�.,�.�,�a �„�,�,,,�.� �� ❑ (CLIP ALL �OCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Ciry Council to pass this resolufion which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. The subject properly is located at 294 Charles Avenue. PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB COMMITTEE CML SERVICH CAMMISSION Has this persw�rtn erer worked under a contrac[ torthis departmeM? YES NO Hes this pe�saufirm e�er been a cdy empbyee4 YES NO Does this persoNfirm poasess a s1611 not namallypossessetl by anY �+� city emPloyee? YES NO Is fhis peBOMrm e fargHetl vendaR YES " I� This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chaptex 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chaptex 43 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties known to the Enforcement Officer wexe given an order to repau ox remove the buitding at 294 Charles Avenue by February 3, 2000; and have failed to comply with those orders. �= . ��a��'� The City will elnninate a nuisance. `; : il[ The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to the pxoperry, A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will contmue to blight the community. ',: Ilt '' 111 sounce Nnisance Housing Abatement (��M COSTIREVENUE BUIXikTED (CtRCLE ONEI I ACTIVRYNUMBER 33261 NO "¢ •• G£?;7�t' C�!S^�h �rs��i';,� � ; � .�. �; ,�t:E��. 0 0 -�.�o REPORT Date: Mazch 7, 2000 Time: 10:00 am. Place: Room 330 City Hall 15 West Kellogg Boulevard LEGISLATIVE HEARING Gerry Strathman Legislative Hearing Officer 1. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 783 Como Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Gerry Strathman recommended laying over to the June 6, 2000, Legislative Hearing on the following condirion: the owner pays the vacant buiiding fee by March 15, 2000. 2. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 294 Charles Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Gerry Strathman recommended approval. 3. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 55 Atwater Street. Gerry Strathman recomxnended denying the appeal, but amending the date to remove tke vehicle to April 15, 2000. I.s;� C[ITZEN SERVICE OFFICE FredOwusu, Ciry Clerk Oo-�.�10 DMSION OF PROPERTY CODE ENF'ORCEMEN'f Mrchael R Mo�ehead Proqram.Llanager i CTI'Y OF SAINT PAUL Nuisance Butlding Code Enforcement Norm Coleman, Mayor IS W. KeZloggBlvd 2n. 190 Te1: 651-266-8SS0 SairaPau7,MN.i5102 Faz:6i7-2668426 i February 11, 2000 NOTICE OF PUSLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Citizen Service Office, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Bnforcement Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution ordering the repair or removai of the nuisance building(s) located at: 294 Charles Avenue The City Council has scheduled the date of these heazings as follows: Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, March 7, 2000 City Council Hearing - Wednesday, March 22, 2000 The owners and responsible parties of record aze: Name and Last Known Address Agnes Wall 294 Charles Avenue St. Paul, MN 5�103 Interest Fee Owner c!o Michael R. Davis 292 Charles Avenue St. Paul, MN 55103-2004 Michael R. Davis 305 Edmund Avenue St. Paul, MN 55103-2004 Tamayer Ta�payer oo-a.�o 294 Charles Avenue February 11, 2000 Pa�e 2 The legal descziption of this property is: Lot 11, Block 22, Robertson and Van Etten's Addition to Saint Paul. Division of Code Enforcement has declared this buildin�(s) to constitute a"nuisance" as defined by Legislative Code, Chapter 45. Division of Code Enforcement has issued an order to the then known responsible parties to eliminate this miisance condition by conectina the deficiencies or by xazin� and removin� this buildin�(s). Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains unabated, the community continues to suffer the blighting influence of this property. It is the recommendation of the Division of Code Enforcement that the City Council pass a resolution ordering the responsible parties to either repair, or demolish and remove this building in a timely manner, and failing that, authorize the Aivision of C.ode Enforcement to proceed to demoliYion and removal, and to assess the costs incurred a�ainst the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as taxes. Sincerely, Steve Mc�gne� Steve Magner Vacant Buildings Supervisor Division of Code Enforcement Citizen Service Office SM:mI cc: Frank Bera, Buildin� Inspection and Desi� Meahan Riley, City Attorneys Office Nancy Anderson, Assistant Secretary to the Council Paul Mordarski, PED-Housin� Division ccnph MINLTTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING Tuesday, Mazch 7, 2000 p0 -�4 b Room 330 Courthouse Gerry 5trathman, Legislative Aearing Officer The meeting was called to order at 10:02 a.m. STAFF PRESENT: Mike Kalis, Code Enforcement; Steve Magner, Code En£orcement Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 783 Como Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Steve Magner gave photographs to Gerry Strathman; they were returned at the end of the meeting.) Steve Magner reported this building is a two story dwelling with a gazage and a metal storage shed. It has been vacant since September 1997. An inspection was conducted on 11-24-97, and a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed and photographs were taken. Vacant building fees are due. Real estate taxes aze unpaid in the amount of $2,939.27. The estimated mazket value of the properiy is $75,300. A code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a bond has not been posted. The estimated cost to repair is $40,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. Burton Murdock, owner, appeazed and stated he has a plan to install a new roof. A roofer was too busy to install one last yeaz. He had trouble with squirrels last year. He uses the properiy as part of his business. Mr. Murdock plans to sell the property after the roof is installed. The only thing wrong with the building is the roof, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Murdock responded that is correct. This is a residence, but it is used as part of a business, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Murdock responded his father purchased the property in 1946 and it is used as a storage facility for their plumbing business. It has been rented at various times over the years. The City found out it wasn't rented and has been bothering him ever since. Mr. Strathman asked why the building is a nuisance. Because of the overall condition of the exterior, responded Mr. Magner. There ue concerns about the deterioration of the roof and rodent infestation. If the roof is repaired, wouid that address the nuisance condition, asked 3vlr. Strathman. IvIr. Magner responded the owner would need to obtain a code compliance inspection, post a bond, obtain the permits, and repair all the items. The owner claims the interior is fine, but he is reluctant to let anyone in. Mr. Murdock responded he was never asked. If the owner chooses to leave the building vacant and pays the vacant building fee, is there anythiug that requires him to get a code compliance inspection, asked Mr. Strathman. To obtain a code compliance certificate, responded Mr. Magner, an inspection has to be done. If the building was to oc -a.�o LEGISLATIVE HEARTNG MINUTES OF 3-7-00 Page 2 remain vacant, the inspection would not have to be done. However, the emphasis of the prograzn is to get the properties rehabilitated. The e�cterior violations constitute a nuisance or violation of the law which is subject by this action or cruninal action. The deficiency list includes other exterior violations, such as the eaves, some deterioration on the siding, and the gazage needs painting. Mr. Murdock stated if he is left alone for si�c months, he will be out of the property and it will be sold. Mr. Magner stated Mr. Murdock has been asked repeatedly what his plans aze, and he has given the same answers that he is providing now. Code Enforcement is not disputing that he does not want to do these items, but would like a time line when it will happen. Mr. Strathman stated the owner has the right to leave the building vacant if thax is what he chooses to do as long as he maintains the exterior. Mr. Magner suggested setting up a time frame to obtain a code compliance inspection, obtain a $2,000 bond, which is going to be required to post the permits, make the exterior repairs, and then revisit this issue as a layover. Or the owner could sell the properry. He would need to have the code compliance inspection to sell the property as required by ordinance. IY s cheaper to haue the code compliance inspection done than a truth-in-housing inspection. One or the other document is needed for anyone to live in the properly and to bring the building into compliance. The owner wouid need a pernut to put a roof on the building and do the other repairs. Mr. Strathman asked when the roof will be done. Mr. Murdock responded it may be done in the next 30 to 60 days. Mr. Strathman stated the vacant building fee is due and wiil have to be paid, and the exterior repairs will have to be done. He is not sure that the code compiiance inspection will haue to be done if the owner does not intend to occupy the buiiding, nor is he sure how the building will be sold without the code compliance inspection. Mr. Murdock responded he has no problem with getting a code compliance inspection after the roof is done. He will bring a check in tomorrow to pay the vacant building fee. What would be the problem if he paid the vacant building fee and got the code compliance inspection done at some point in the future, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Magner responded they will not issue a permit for his roof until a bond and code compliance inspection aze done. That is a set policy by the building department. Mr. Magner does not see the reason why the inspection cannot be done. Mr. Murdock responded he does not want an inspector in his home because he does not trust them and he has been lied to before. He should not have to feel guiity because it is vacant. Gerry Strathman recommended this matter be laid over to the June 6, 2000, Legislative Hearing on the following condition: the owner pays the vacant building fee by March 15, 2000. Hopefully, the roof wili be installed in three months, and the building will be ready for sale. Mr. Magner added Mr. Murdock will need to be here on June 6 or send a representative. D o -�'io LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF 3-7-00 Page 3 Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 294 Charles Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Steve Magner gave photographs to Gerry Stratlwiazi.) Steve Magner reported the building has been vacant since April 1998. Five sununary abatement notices have been issued to remove refuse, cut tall grass, and remove snow from the public sidewallc. An inspection was conducted on 12-16-99, and a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed and photographs were taken. Vacant building fees aze due. Real estate ta�tes are unpaid in the amount of $2,219.25. The estimated mazket value of the property is $65,600. A code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a bond has not been posted. The estnnated cost to repair is $25,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. The owner is Agnes Wall. The person in controi of this building is Michael R. Davis. He has disappeared in the last year and is a member of the armed services. Mr. Sirathman asked about the high mazket value of the property. Mr. Magner responded that seems unchazacterisfically high, but the value comes from Rainsey County Taxation. Gerry Strathman recommended approval. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 55 Atwater Street. William Johnson, owner, appeared and stated he was not awaze that there was a law ar code that he could not have a vehicle on his properry. He got into an accident and it runs, but he does not want to drive it in its condition. He would like an additional month to get it repaired. In answer to questions, Mr. Johnson responded the vehicle does not fit in his garage and he will remove it in 30 days, licensed, and operable. Gerty Strathman denied the appeal, but amended the date to repair the vehicle to April 15, 2000. The meeting was adj ourned at 10:31 a.m. rrn ORlG1NAL RESOLUTION Presented By Referred "I Council File # 00 — SRO Green Sheet # � f,�g.'1,Rq _ 1 WIIEREAS, Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement has requested the City 2 Council to hold public heazings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or 3 wrecking and removal of a two-story, wood frame duplex with a detached, one-stall, wood frame gazage 4 and wood shed located on properiy hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Properiy" and commonly 5 known as 294 Chazies Avenue. This property is legally described as follows, to wit: 6 7 Lot 11, Block 22, Robertson and Van Etten's Addition to Saint Paul. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or before November 10, 1999, the following are the now known interested ar responsible parties for the Subject Property: Agnes WaTl, 294 Charles Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55103; c/o Michael R. Davis, 292 Chazles Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55103-2004; Michael R. Davis, 305 Edmund Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55103-2004 WHEREAS, Division of Code Enforcement has served in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code an order identified as an"Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s)" dated January 4, 2000; and WIIEREAS, this order informed the then lrnown interested or responsible parties that the structure located on the Subject Property is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and WIIEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or demolish the structure located on the Subject Properiy by February 3, 2000; and WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declazing this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolition; and WIIEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Division of Code Enforcement requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and WHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legisiative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the public hearings; and CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA oe-ZRo 1 WIIEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City 2 Council on Tuesday, Mazch 7, 2000 to hear testunony and evidence, and after receiving testimony and 3 evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible parties 4 to make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and 5 remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all 6 applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in 7 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of the structure to 8 be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing; and 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, Mazch 22, 2000 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was considered by the Council; now therefore BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the above referenced public hearings, the Saint Paul City Council hereby adopts the following Findings and Order conceming the Subject Property at 294 Chazles Avenue: 1. 2. � 7 � That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined 'm Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45. That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is estimated to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000.00). That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or Building code violations at the Subject Property. That an Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) was sent to the then known responsible parties to correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected. That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placard on the Subject Properiy which declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition. That this building has been routinely monitored by the Citizen Service O�ces, Division of Code Enforcement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings. That the known interested parties and owners are as previously stated in this resolution and that the notification requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled. �'� • The Saint Paul CiTy Council hereby makes the following order: 45 1. The above referenced interested or responsible parties shail make the Subject Property safe and 46 not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and remove its blighting influence 47 on the community by rehabilitating this structure and correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in 48 the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accordance with all applicable 49 codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the stnxcture in 50 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation ar demolition and 51 removal of the structure must be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council 52 Hearing. �� i G I�l A L a�.�� 2 2. ff the above corrective action is not completed within this period of time the Citizen Service 3 Office, Division of Code Enforcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps aze necessary 4 to demolish and remove this structure, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the 5 Subject Properly pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal property or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this tune period. If all personal properry is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shali remove and dispose of such property as provided by law. 4. It is further ordered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to the owners and interested parties in accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Yeas Navs Absen� Benanav Blakev ✓ Bostrom ✓ Coleman Harris Lantrv ✓ Reiter _ � V Adopted by Council: Date Q� S��a-� , Adoption Certified by Council Secretary B y' � �� / •. I: Requested by Department of: Citizen Service Office: Code Enforcement BY �, �Z �--. �- V ��^�-� a'D �� Form Approved by City Attorney By: . � ' Approved by Mayor for Submission to Councii BY: �'/! l�-j"i�'/ Michael R Morehead 266-8439 � TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE 00 -a.�,c GREEN SHEET No 1022 79 ` � � f �,u.�.�,o, d,,,� � m,..,.� ❑ �«� ❑�,�,� ❑.,�.,�.�,�a �„�,�,,,�.� �� ❑ (CLIP ALL �OCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) Ciry Council to pass this resolufion which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. The subject properly is located at 294 Charles Avenue. PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB COMMITTEE CML SERVICH CAMMISSION Has this persw�rtn erer worked under a contrac[ torthis departmeM? YES NO Hes this pe�saufirm e�er been a cdy empbyee4 YES NO Does this persoNfirm poasess a s1611 not namallypossessetl by anY �+� city emPloyee? YES NO Is fhis peBOMrm e fargHetl vendaR YES " I� This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chaptex 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chaptex 43 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties known to the Enforcement Officer wexe given an order to repau ox remove the buitding at 294 Charles Avenue by February 3, 2000; and have failed to comply with those orders. �= . ��a��'� The City will elnninate a nuisance. `; : il[ The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to the pxoperry, A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will contmue to blight the community. ',: Ilt '' 111 sounce Nnisance Housing Abatement (��M COSTIREVENUE BUIXikTED (CtRCLE ONEI I ACTIVRYNUMBER 33261 NO "¢ •• G£?;7�t' C�!S^�h �rs��i';,� � ; � .�. �; ,�t:E��. 0 0 -�.�o REPORT Date: Mazch 7, 2000 Time: 10:00 am. Place: Room 330 City Hall 15 West Kellogg Boulevard LEGISLATIVE HEARING Gerry Strathman Legislative Hearing Officer 1. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 783 Como Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Gerry Strathman recommended laying over to the June 6, 2000, Legislative Hearing on the following condirion: the owner pays the vacant buiiding fee by March 15, 2000. 2. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 294 Charles Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Gerry Strathman recommended approval. 3. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 55 Atwater Street. Gerry Strathman recomxnended denying the appeal, but amending the date to remove tke vehicle to April 15, 2000. I.s;� C[ITZEN SERVICE OFFICE FredOwusu, Ciry Clerk Oo-�.�10 DMSION OF PROPERTY CODE ENF'ORCEMEN'f Mrchael R Mo�ehead Proqram.Llanager i CTI'Y OF SAINT PAUL Nuisance Butlding Code Enforcement Norm Coleman, Mayor IS W. KeZloggBlvd 2n. 190 Te1: 651-266-8SS0 SairaPau7,MN.i5102 Faz:6i7-2668426 i February 11, 2000 NOTICE OF PUSLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Citizen Service Office, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Bnforcement Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution ordering the repair or removai of the nuisance building(s) located at: 294 Charles Avenue The City Council has scheduled the date of these heazings as follows: Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, March 7, 2000 City Council Hearing - Wednesday, March 22, 2000 The owners and responsible parties of record aze: Name and Last Known Address Agnes Wall 294 Charles Avenue St. Paul, MN 5�103 Interest Fee Owner c!o Michael R. Davis 292 Charles Avenue St. Paul, MN 55103-2004 Michael R. Davis 305 Edmund Avenue St. Paul, MN 55103-2004 Tamayer Ta�payer oo-a.�o 294 Charles Avenue February 11, 2000 Pa�e 2 The legal descziption of this property is: Lot 11, Block 22, Robertson and Van Etten's Addition to Saint Paul. Division of Code Enforcement has declared this buildin�(s) to constitute a"nuisance" as defined by Legislative Code, Chapter 45. Division of Code Enforcement has issued an order to the then known responsible parties to eliminate this miisance condition by conectina the deficiencies or by xazin� and removin� this buildin�(s). Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains unabated, the community continues to suffer the blighting influence of this property. It is the recommendation of the Division of Code Enforcement that the City Council pass a resolution ordering the responsible parties to either repair, or demolish and remove this building in a timely manner, and failing that, authorize the Aivision of C.ode Enforcement to proceed to demoliYion and removal, and to assess the costs incurred a�ainst the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as taxes. Sincerely, Steve Mc�gne� Steve Magner Vacant Buildings Supervisor Division of Code Enforcement Citizen Service Office SM:mI cc: Frank Bera, Buildin� Inspection and Desi� Meahan Riley, City Attorneys Office Nancy Anderson, Assistant Secretary to the Council Paul Mordarski, PED-Housin� Division ccnph MINLTTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING Tuesday, Mazch 7, 2000 p0 -�4 b Room 330 Courthouse Gerry 5trathman, Legislative Aearing Officer The meeting was called to order at 10:02 a.m. STAFF PRESENT: Mike Kalis, Code Enforcement; Steve Magner, Code En£orcement Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 783 Como Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Steve Magner gave photographs to Gerry Strathman; they were returned at the end of the meeting.) Steve Magner reported this building is a two story dwelling with a gazage and a metal storage shed. It has been vacant since September 1997. An inspection was conducted on 11-24-97, and a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed and photographs were taken. Vacant building fees are due. Real estate taxes aze unpaid in the amount of $2,939.27. The estimated mazket value of the properiy is $75,300. A code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a bond has not been posted. The estimated cost to repair is $40,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. Burton Murdock, owner, appeazed and stated he has a plan to install a new roof. A roofer was too busy to install one last yeaz. He had trouble with squirrels last year. He uses the properiy as part of his business. Mr. Murdock plans to sell the property after the roof is installed. The only thing wrong with the building is the roof, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Murdock responded that is correct. This is a residence, but it is used as part of a business, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Murdock responded his father purchased the property in 1946 and it is used as a storage facility for their plumbing business. It has been rented at various times over the years. The City found out it wasn't rented and has been bothering him ever since. Mr. Strathman asked why the building is a nuisance. Because of the overall condition of the exterior, responded Mr. Magner. There ue concerns about the deterioration of the roof and rodent infestation. If the roof is repaired, wouid that address the nuisance condition, asked 3vlr. Strathman. IvIr. Magner responded the owner would need to obtain a code compliance inspection, post a bond, obtain the permits, and repair all the items. The owner claims the interior is fine, but he is reluctant to let anyone in. Mr. Murdock responded he was never asked. If the owner chooses to leave the building vacant and pays the vacant building fee, is there anythiug that requires him to get a code compliance inspection, asked Mr. Strathman. To obtain a code compliance certificate, responded Mr. Magner, an inspection has to be done. If the building was to oc -a.�o LEGISLATIVE HEARTNG MINUTES OF 3-7-00 Page 2 remain vacant, the inspection would not have to be done. However, the emphasis of the prograzn is to get the properties rehabilitated. The e�cterior violations constitute a nuisance or violation of the law which is subject by this action or cruninal action. The deficiency list includes other exterior violations, such as the eaves, some deterioration on the siding, and the gazage needs painting. Mr. Murdock stated if he is left alone for si�c months, he will be out of the property and it will be sold. Mr. Magner stated Mr. Murdock has been asked repeatedly what his plans aze, and he has given the same answers that he is providing now. Code Enforcement is not disputing that he does not want to do these items, but would like a time line when it will happen. Mr. Strathman stated the owner has the right to leave the building vacant if thax is what he chooses to do as long as he maintains the exterior. Mr. Magner suggested setting up a time frame to obtain a code compliance inspection, obtain a $2,000 bond, which is going to be required to post the permits, make the exterior repairs, and then revisit this issue as a layover. Or the owner could sell the properry. He would need to have the code compliance inspection to sell the property as required by ordinance. IY s cheaper to haue the code compliance inspection done than a truth-in-housing inspection. One or the other document is needed for anyone to live in the properly and to bring the building into compliance. The owner wouid need a pernut to put a roof on the building and do the other repairs. Mr. Strathman asked when the roof will be done. Mr. Murdock responded it may be done in the next 30 to 60 days. Mr. Strathman stated the vacant building fee is due and wiil have to be paid, and the exterior repairs will have to be done. He is not sure that the code compiiance inspection will haue to be done if the owner does not intend to occupy the buiiding, nor is he sure how the building will be sold without the code compliance inspection. Mr. Murdock responded he has no problem with getting a code compliance inspection after the roof is done. He will bring a check in tomorrow to pay the vacant building fee. What would be the problem if he paid the vacant building fee and got the code compliance inspection done at some point in the future, asked Mr. Strathman. Mr. Magner responded they will not issue a permit for his roof until a bond and code compliance inspection aze done. That is a set policy by the building department. Mr. Magner does not see the reason why the inspection cannot be done. Mr. Murdock responded he does not want an inspector in his home because he does not trust them and he has been lied to before. He should not have to feel guiity because it is vacant. Gerry Strathman recommended this matter be laid over to the June 6, 2000, Legislative Hearing on the following condition: the owner pays the vacant building fee by March 15, 2000. Hopefully, the roof wili be installed in three months, and the building will be ready for sale. Mr. Magner added Mr. Murdock will need to be here on June 6 or send a representative. D o -�'io LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF 3-7-00 Page 3 Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building at 294 Charles Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Steve Magner gave photographs to Gerry Stratlwiazi.) Steve Magner reported the building has been vacant since April 1998. Five sununary abatement notices have been issued to remove refuse, cut tall grass, and remove snow from the public sidewallc. An inspection was conducted on 12-16-99, and a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed and photographs were taken. Vacant building fees aze due. Real estate ta�tes are unpaid in the amount of $2,219.25. The estimated mazket value of the property is $65,600. A code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a bond has not been posted. The estnnated cost to repair is $25,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. The owner is Agnes Wall. The person in controi of this building is Michael R. Davis. He has disappeared in the last year and is a member of the armed services. Mr. Sirathman asked about the high mazket value of the property. Mr. Magner responded that seems unchazacterisfically high, but the value comes from Rainsey County Taxation. Gerry Strathman recommended approval. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 55 Atwater Street. William Johnson, owner, appeared and stated he was not awaze that there was a law ar code that he could not have a vehicle on his properry. He got into an accident and it runs, but he does not want to drive it in its condition. He would like an additional month to get it repaired. In answer to questions, Mr. Johnson responded the vehicle does not fit in his garage and he will remove it in 30 days, licensed, and operable. Gerty Strathman denied the appeal, but amended the date to repair the vehicle to April 15, 2000. The meeting was adj ourned at 10:31 a.m. rrn