The URL can be used to link to this page

01-990Council File # 0 l- 9q0 RESOLUTION Presented By Referred To Green Sheet # �0.135D G7 4� Committee: Date 2 4 5 6 7 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 WHEREAS, Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement has requested the City Council to hold public hearings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or wrecking and removal of a one-story, concrete block, wood frazne, structure (formerly a gas station) and the attached, auto repair bays located on properiy hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Properiy" and commonly known as 62 Wimfred Street West. This properiy is legally described as follows, to wit: Lot 4, Merrill's Subdivision of the West 1/2 of Block 79, West Saint Paul Proper. WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or befare May 13, 2001, the following are the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Capitol City Construction, Attn: Andrew W. Bravo, 216 Morton, Street, St. Paul, MN 55107 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 WHEREAS, this order informed the then known interested or responsible parties that the shucture located on the Subject Property is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and WHEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or demolish the structure located on the Subject Property by February 13, 2000; and WHEREAS, the enfarcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condirion; subject to demolition; and WHEREAS, 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 Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the public hearings; and WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City Council on Tuesday, September 4, 2001 to hear testimony and evidence, and after receiving testunony and evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested ar responsible parties to make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with ali applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of the struchxre to be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing; and 0�-1qo 2 3 4 5 6 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 45 46 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, September 19, 2001 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was considered by the Council; now therefare 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 62 Wurifred Street West: 1. � 3. Q Q That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paui 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 lrnown responsible parties to correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the buiiding(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected. That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placard on the Subject Property which declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition. That this building has been routinely monitored by the Citizen Service Offices, Division of Code Enforcement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings. That the known interested parties and owners aze as previousiy stated in this resolution and that the notificarion requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled. �� • The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order: The above referenced interested or responsible parties shall make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating tlus shucture and correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accardance with all applicable codes and ordinances, or in the altemative by demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ardinances. The rehabilitation or demolition and removal of the structure must be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing. 2. If the above corrective action is not completed within this period of time the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enfarcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to demolish and remove this shucture, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject 0�-9�0 Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. � 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal property or fi�ctures of any kind which interfere with the demolirion and removal shall be removed firom the property by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If all personal property is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shall 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. Adopted by Councii: Date w_.-�,... �y a � �, , Adoption Certified by Council Secretary � �.� � -�� . � �.- I.% i //� ♦ � �/L // Requested by Department of: Cirizen Service Office; Code Enforcement B y . ' J� 2 ---�' ` �� Form Approved by City Attorney Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: �,��;�� V o�-91c GREEN SHEET No 102350 � � 1 �.,� _- ,_ �.�.,a - -_ �� ir!'.! L�7 TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES ��. ��. �wvde�e�ansnw�} ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCA O�SIGNATUR� ty,�ounci�to pass this resolution which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If ; owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is ordered remove the building. The subject property is located at 62 Winifred Street West. � PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB CAMMRTEE qVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Has this P�Mrm e�arwrorked untler a contract tarthis-dePa�enl? VES NO Fies tnis P��m ever been a cily emyloyee9 YES NO Dces Mis Pa��m possess a sidll not nnmalNPO� �' anY cunmt citY emWoYee9 YES NO' Is Mis persorUfirm a tafpeted veiMoR . � VE5 NO �''"s`�u�uig s i a n�uisanc� c�hi "�`g�s �e�"i`�ed in Chapter 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paui Legislarive Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties lrnown to the Enforcement Officer were given an order to repair or remove the building at 62 Winifred Street West by February 15, 2000, and have failed to comply with those orders. •--. �. The City will eliminate a nuisance. )ISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to "the property, 71S4OVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED � A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will continue to blight the community. AoUNT OF TRANSAC170N 1 $9 ,000 - $10,000 � Nuisance Housing Abatement souRCe Coux� �arch Centee AUG 212061 COSTrttEVR1UEBUD6ETED(qRCLEONE) � 33261 �crnm N�Ere NO CITIZEN SERVICE OFfICE Fred Avusu, Ciry C(erk �I '�lRo DMSION OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT Mich¢el R Morehead Pra.¢ram Mana,¢er CTI`Y OF SAR�IT PAUL Norm Coleman, Mayor Nuisance Building Code Enforcement IS W. Kellogg8[vd. Rm. 190 Tei: 651-2668440 Saint Pau1, MN55702 ` Faz: 651-26b8426 E�ll�llSt 1�� 2��1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Catizen Service Office, Vacant/Nuisance Buildin�s Enforcement Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution ordering the repair or removal of the nuisance building(s) located at: : 62 Winifred Street West The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows: Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, September 4, 2001 City Council Hearing - Wednesday,:September 19, 2001 The owners and responsible parties of record are: Name and Last Known Address Capitol City Consixuction Atin: Andrew W. Bravo 216 Morton Street Interest Fee Owner St. Paul, MN 55107 The legal description of this property is: Lot 4, Memll's Subdivision of the West'/z of Block 79, West Saint Paul Proper. 62 Wuufred Street West au�st io, aooi Pa�e 2 0�-99a Division of Code Enforcement has declazed this building(s) to constitute a"nuisance" as defined by Le�islarive Code, Chapter 45. Division of Code Enforcement has issued an order to the then lmown responsible parties to eliminate this nuisance condirion by correctin� the deficiencies or by razing and removing this buildina(s). Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied witYt the nuisance condition remains unabated, the community continues to suffer the bli;hting influence of this properiy. 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 buildin� in a timely manner, and failing that, authorize the Division of Code Enforcement to proceed to demolition and removal, and to assess the costs incurred against the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as taxes. Sincerely, Steve �Vlagner =• Steve Magner Vacant Buildings Supervisor Division of Code Enforcement Citizen Service Office SM:ml cc: Frank Berg, Building Inspection and Desi� Meghan Riley, City Attomeys Office Nancy Anderson, Assistant Secretary to the Council Laurie Kaplan, PED-Housing Division ccnph REPORT Date: September 4, 2001 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Room 330 City Ha11 15 West Kellogg Boulevazd LEGISLATIVE HEARING Gerry Strathman Legislafive Hearing Officer ►� Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the properry at 393 Sidnev Street East. If the owner faiis to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Laid over from 8-7-01) Legislative Hearing Officer recomxnends laying over to the October 2, 2001, Legislative Hearing. Summary Abatements J0102B Grass cutting (by private contractor) during June and part of July 2001; JOl O5A Properry cleanup during June and part of July 2001; J0104B Boarding up of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; J0104C Demolition of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; and JOl O5V Abandoned vehicles towed from private properiy during June and part of 3uly 2001. 579 Van Buren Avenue (JOlOSV) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 1119 Geranium Avenue East (J0104B) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 422 Jessamine Avenue East (JOlOSV) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 811 Van Buren Avenue (30102G) Legislative Hearing Oi�icer recommends approval of the assessment. 456 Lawson Avenue West (JOl O5A) Legislarive Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 555 Blair Avenue (JOlOSA) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. � ► -990 914 Concordia Avenue (JOlOSA) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. oi-Y�a LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 2 250 Page Street East (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approvai of the assessment. 1595 Thomas Avenue (JO105� Legislative Hearin� Off cer recommends deleting the assessment. 639 Blair Avenue (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing O�cer recommends approval of the assessment 408 Banfil Street (JOl O5A) Mr. Strathman recommends reducing the assessment to $50 plus the $45 service fee for a total assessment of $95. 657 Dale Street North (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 324 Jenks Avenue (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 462 Edmund Avenue (JO105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 967 E�erton Street (JO105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 65 Winnipeg Avenue (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 65 Winnipe2 Avenue (70105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 605 Masnolia Avenue East (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 291 Tonnin2 (JO105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 3. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the properry at 847 Le�n t�on Pazkway 5outh. If the owner faiis to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the November 6, 2001, Legislative Hearing. LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 � 5. :� Summary Abatement Order Appeal for 1598 Hazel Street North. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the September 25, 2001, Legislative Hearing. Page 3 0►-9qD Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1124 Conwav Street. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 245 Front Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 62 Winifred Street West. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. 0 MINLTTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING Tuesday, September 4, 2001 Room 330 City Hall Gerry Strathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Steve Magner, Code Enforcement; Harold Robinson, Code Enforcement Gerry Sirathman called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 393 Sidney Street East. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Laid over from 8-7-01) 01-990 Steve Magner reported 11us was laid over in order for the attorney representing the fee owner and Lutheran Social Services to sell the property. The attomey submitted to Mr. Magner a proposal to sell the property to the West Side Neighborhood Development Alliance. They are waiting for the closing and have to obtain a code compliance inspection. Mr. Magner suggested this matter be laid over for the closing of the sell and so NEDA can obtaiu a bond. George F. Borer appeazed to request an ea�tension of a month in order to close on the property. The probate court approved the sell this moming. The other status was cleazed up earlier. Gerry Stratl�man laid over this matter to October 2, 2001, in order for NEDA to close on the property. Summary Abatements J0102B Grass cutting (by private contractor) during June and part of July 2U01; J0105A Property cleanup during June and part of July 2001; J0104B Boarding up of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; J0104C Demolition of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; and JOlOSV Abandoned vehicles towed from private property during June and part of July 2001. 579 Van Buren Avenue (JOlOSV) (No one appeared to represent the property.) Gerry Stratlmian recommends approval. 1119 Geranium Avenue East (J0104B) (No one appeared to represent the properiy.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 2 422 Jessamine Avenue East (JO105� (No one appeared to represent the proper[y.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 811 Van Buren Avenue (J0102G) (No one appeared to represent the properiy.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 456 Lawson Avenue West (JOl O5A) (No one appeared to represent the properry.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 555 Blair Avenue (JOl O5A) O► �-99� Steve Plowman, Real Estate Broker, 386 Wabasha Street North, appeared and stated he was asked by the owners to check into this. They were unawaze what this charge was for. The property has been condemned. People were hired to clean out the property, which was completed yesterday. The owner of the company that did the cleaning is interested in purchasing the property. The owners are willing to get rid of the properry for what they owe on it or even a little less. Gerry Strathman stated his information is that orders were sent on May 17, 2001, to clean up fiuniture, refuse, bike pazts by May 29. The inspector went out again on May 30, deternuned the cleanup did not take place, and ordered the City to do it. The City crew went out on 7une 6. The total chazge is $288.00. Mr. Strathman stated he could see the videotape. Mr. Plowman responded that is not necessary because the property was a problem. Gerry Strathman recommends approval of the assessment 914 Concordia Avenue (JOl O5A) Meredith Price, National Mazketing, 12249 Nicollet Avenue South, Burnsville, appeared and stated they never received notice that there was going to be an abatement proceeding. Her understanding is that it was sent to the wrong party. This was a vacant house. It was under renovation. National Marketing took it over, and hauled out three dumpsters of refuse. The items cleaned up by the City were not theirs. Some of the things cleaned up were not on her properiy; there is an empty lot next door. Her company has the crews to do ttris work. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 3 Gerry Strathman stated the information he has is that orders were mailed on 7une 12, 2001; he �) � R � asked who it was sent to. Hatold Robinson responded orders were mailed on June 12 to Ameriquest and to the occupant at 914 Concordia At the time, Ameriquest was listed as the owner. Code Enforcement did not get any mail rehuned. Ms. Price responded that her company acquired the property in Mazch Ramsey County may be behind in their updating. Mr. Strathman asked was the sell recorded. Ms. Price responded yes and they have title lncnian�, Mr. Strathman asked who was living there in 7une. Ms. Price responded no one. It was unfit for habitation. It had to be gutted. Gerry Strathman deleted the assessment on the basis of incorrect notificafion. The City did what it was suppose to do, but it is evident that Code Enforcement received incorrect information from Ramsey County regazding ownerslup. 250 Page Sh�eet East (JOlOSA) (No one appeazed to represem the property.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 1595 Thomas Avenue (JOlOSV) The following appeazed: Terry Glanz and Cnreg Glanz, owners. Terry stated three cars were towed offthe property. Hazold Itobinson reported the vehicles appeared inoperable and no licenses were visible. If a vehicle has been sitting in one place for a long time, the inspector considers it inoperable, but the velucles cleazly had no visible licenses. Terry L. Glanz was notified at 1595 Thomas Avenue. Orders were mailed on January 25, 2001. Mr. Strathman asked what they have to show that the vehicles were licensed. Terry Glanz responded he has paperwork and lus brother went through the process of getting license plates and tabs after the notices were received. They have insurance waivers. Mr. Strathman asked when did they get them licensed. Greg Glanz responded they were licensed the year before all this took place. He had the license plates on the vehicle, he took them off, and put them inside the vehicle in the window. There was a problem with license piates being stolen off of cars. This happened when there was a lot of snow. He knocked the snow off the windows so they were visible. Mr. Strathman stated once the vehicles were towed, why were they not retrieved. Terry Glanz responded he did not hy because he did not l�ow lus brother had insurance waivers. His brother said a few weeks later that he had insurance waivers and the vehicles were legally licensed but LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 4 Ol-190 could not be driven. One of the vehicles was operable. There was a transmission and engine being worked on. The Horizon was waiting for an engine also. The Glanzes showed Mr. Strathman some documents showing the vehicles were licensed, the insurance waiver, and photographs. Gerry Strathman deleted the assessment. 639 Blair Avenue (JOl O5A) (No one appeazed to represent the properry.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 408 Banfil Street (JOl O5A) Kimie Kearney, owner, appeazed and stated she has a$288 assessment for yard cleanup and she wanted to know what was done. (A videotape was shown.) Ms. Kearney stated it was four bags of recycled cans for $288. She had mowed the yazd and she is letting the bushes grow a bit. Mr. Strathman stated the storage of trash in the bags was not in compliance with City codes; they need to be in containers. Ms. Keazney responded it was her granddaughter's recycling. Ms. Kearney had taken them out of the garage so they could be taken to the recyciing place. Mr. Strathman reduced the assessment to $50 plus the $45 service fee for a total assessment of $95. The City crew did go out, and there were some things improperly stored; however, the situation did not look that bad on the videotape. 657 Dale Street North (J0105A) Michael Burger, owner, 915 Reed Street, Mankato, appeazed and stated this property and two others were in a partnership between himself and someone else. On Februasy 27, 2001, they mutually agreed to end their partnership. These properties were in Mr. Burger's name. He did a quick claim deed and put them all in the other person's name. The property probabiy did need to be cleaned up, but at the tnne he was not responsible for the pmperties. He is not currently the owner. Mr. Strathman asked who was notified. Mr. Berger responded it was mailed to 1107 Jenks. That mail was returned to the City. The City mailed it to another address. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 5 O I -'It0 Hazold Robinson reported the last time there was an abatement at that address was June 29. Their records still show Michael Burger at 1107 Jenks. Mr. Robinson suggested that Mr. Burger deal with Taa�ation or the former partner to make sure the records get transferred. Crerry Strathman recommends approval of the assessment. 324 Jenks Avenue (JOl O5A) Jean Johnson, 5000 Otter Lake Road, White Bear, appeazed and stated they were on a contract for deed at the time tlus occurred. The information went to Charles Zeches because that name was still on it. She asked when this was done. Mr. Strathman responded the notice was sent on May 10, 2001, and the work was done on May 29. Ms. Johnson stated a tenant handed her paperwork on approximately May 30. It did need cleaning. She looked at the backyazd after she was handed the notice, and there were mattresses and gazbage there. Mr. Strathman asked who was notified. Hazold Robinson responded "OccupanY' at 324 Jenks and Chazles Zeches at 777 Sia�th Street East. Gerry Strathman recommended approval of the assessment. The City notified the owner of record. The occupant was also notified, which goes beyond what is required. There was an 18 day period beriveen when she was notified and the City actually did the cleanup. 462 Edmund Avenue (JOlOSV) The following appeazed: Wanda Bulditz, 7062 19th Street North, Oakdale; Marie Keyes, 462 Edmund Avenue # 1; and Heriberto Gazrido, owner, 7062 19th Street North, Oakdale. Ms. Bulditz stated she got a notice regarding a vehicle removed from hez property. She wanted to know why because she gave her tenant permission to pazk a vehicle there. A week later, the caz was not there so Ms. Bulditz assumed the vehicle was never parked there. Then, she got a bill. Ms. Keyes stated this was her daughter's caz. She called the Police Department Impound lot. No one admitted to having the car. The tabs were good, and the caz was operable. Ms. Keyes had no need to drive the vehicie so she parked it at the property. It was not even there three days. She brought the caz there Monday night. When she came home on Thursday, the vehicle was gone. Mr. Robinson stated the inspection was done on January 26, 2001. The vehicle had an expired license. The recheck was done on February 2 and an impound order was sent in. The police towed it on February 20 with the license still expired. Mr. Strathman asked did she not get the caz because she did not know where it was located. Ms. Keyes responded no one would tell her that it was towed. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 6 �l� Mr. Strathman asked what triggered this inspection. Hazold Robinson responded probably a complaint It was towed by the police department. Mr. Strathman deleted the assessment. He is unsure why the Impound Lot did not tell the owner the car was there. Ms. Bulditz stated she is a real estate agent and lmows that Ramsey County is six months behind in their record keeping. 967 Edgerton Street (JO105� Aleaiis Abreu, owner, appeared and stated this vehicle belonged to a tenant that lived at the properiy. The tenant bought the vehicle, stored it in the garage for a while, then moved it out. Some items were missing from the property. Mr. Abreu was going to hold this vehicle to see if he would come back_ The car did not start and he had keys. Mr. Abreu called a police officer that is a friend of lus. This police officer ticketed the caz fust. He said he would come back later, and if the vehicle is still there, he would have it moved. A few days later, the vehicle was gone, and Mr. Abreu assumed this officer took it. Later, this officer asked what happened to the vehicle, and Mr. Abreu received a bill in the mail. Mr. Strathman asked when the orders were mailed. Mr. Robinson responded orders were mailed twice: January 24, 2001, and Febn�ary 12 to Ale�ris Abreu and the occupant, both of 967 Edgerton. Mr. Abreu stated when he got the January notice, that is when he called his friend who ticketed the vehicle. Mr. Strathman asked if the police officer had ordered the vehicle towed, would the assessment go to the properry owner. Mr. Robinson responded it would be an administrative tow. The car is cited, towed, and the vehicle owner has to recover the vehicle. Steve Magner stated the property owner has to be present during an administrative tow to identify the vehicle. Mr. Robinson stated if he had said to the inspector that a police officer is working on this and it would be towed in a few days, there would not have been a problem. Gerry Strathman recommends deleting the assessment. 65 Winnipe¢ Avenue (JOlOSA) 65 Winni�ee Avenue (JOlOSV) Milt Randall, tenant, appeazed and stated the owner lives in Wisconsin and Mr. Randall feels he is responsible for what happens at the properry. There are two assessments here. One involves a vehicle that was towed and the other assessment is for a cleanup. (The cieanup was discussed first.) During the time of this assessment, said Mr. Randall, he was in the process of switching trash companies. For a month, he had to call his trash company because they were not picking it up. Then he got the assessment. He thought the company had finally taken the trash, but the Ciiy had 6 � �q'�o LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 page '7 instead. The assessment was sent to Wisconsin. By the time it got to Mr. Randall, he did not have time to do anything. (A videotape was shown.) Mr- Randall stated kids strip bikes and throw them in the rear of his house. The appliances came from lus house and were suppose to be picked up by the trash company. Gerry Strathman stated the owner was notified, the occupant received notice, and it was almost two weeks between the time notice was sent and the City did the cleanup. There was opportunity for someone to do the cleanup. Mr. Robinson stated orders went out on May 15, and a reinspection was done on May 23. The occupants supposedly called the inspector on May 23 to say he would take care of it by the weekend. The inspector went over there on May 30, the items were still there, so he issued the work order. (Now, the vehicles were discussed.) Gerry Strathman asked about the vehicles. Mr. Randall responded the inspector told him he had to move the cazs. He put one in the garage and the other right beside the garage on the slab. The inspector told him the plates were not current so he could not pazk it there. Mr. Randall put insurance on the car and current plates. Three days later, the caz was towed. The tabs were on the velucle when it was towed. He purchased the tabs the day after he received the notice. Mr. Strathinan stated orders were mailed on Januazy 18, the inspector went out an February 5, and again on February 21. Mr. Strathman asked did he have anything showing the vehicle had current piates. Mr. Randall responded he did not have anythiug with him. Mr. Strathman asked when the vehicle was towed. Mr. Robinson responded he was not sure when it was towed. JOl O5A - Mr. Strathman recommends approval of the assessment. 'The two appliances cleazly had been stored there. The owner had more than two weeks to get rid of them. J0105V - Mr. Strathman recoxnmends deleting the assessment ifthe owner can get him something showing the vehicle had legal tabs and legal plates when it was towed in February. If the owner cannot supply him with that, then the assessment stands. NOTE: Mr. Randall did bring in evidence that he purchased tabs on February 24, 2001. Upon checking with the Impound Lot, it was found that the vehicle arrived there on Mazch 3. Therefore, Gerry Strathman recommends deleting the assessment. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 605 Mag.nolia Avenue East (JOl O5A) 01—`t'�o Page 8 Mel Guyett, owner, appeazed and stated he purchased the properry recently. A fence was installed and bushes were removed. He was making azrangements to haul them away. He works about 12 hours a day and he could only do it on the weekend. He came home with a truck and a trailer to take it out of there. He has a friend who will sometimes do surprise things for him. Mr. Guyett thought this friend had done the work.. Mr. Strathman asked who was notified. Mr. Robinson responded Todd K. and Mary Kay Lewis were noiified at 605 Magnolia This was done on May 15, 2001, rechecked on May 12, and the work was done on May 29. Mr. Strathman asked when he became the owner. Mr. Guyett responded about July 7, 2001. Mr. Robinson responded the orders went out May 15. Gerry Strathman recommends approval of the assessment. When the owner purchased the property, he became responsible for the assessment. The seller is required to certify that there aze no pending assessments. If there are, the owner is suppose to take caze of them. The owner has the right to go to the previous owner because they aze responsible for it. Mr. Magner added that tifle insurance should cover things like this. Resolnrion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 84'7 Le�eington Parkwav South. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Mr. Magner showed photographs to Mr. Strathman.) John Kratz, owner, 1424 Edgcumbe Road, appeared and stated he just acquired this property on August 1. He would like to lay over this matter and wouid like to attach this property to another property adjacent to it. He would like to build a 12 unit townhouse. If that gets approved, this property will be torn down. The approval process is lengthy on this. He would like to do this in the fall. It is more likely to be six months. Given his plan to remove the building and given that the properry is a biight, Gerry Strathman asked, what is ihe problem with the property being removed now. Mr. Kratz responded his plan would be to rehabilitate the building if his plan is not approved. These matters can be highly chazged with neighborhood involvement. This property seems to be getting off to a friendlier start with the neighbors and he is more optimistic about the development. Steve Magner reported the properry has been vacant since Mazch l, 2000. Eight siunmary abatement notices have been issued to secure the house, cut tall grass, remove t.v. antenna, and remove hazardous mud and sand on sidewalk. On June 19, 2001, an inspecfion of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which consritute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. P,n order to abate a nuisance building was issued on July 11, 2001, with a compliance date of August 10. The vacant building fees aze paid. A code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a bond has not been posted. Estimated cost to repair is $80,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000. Mr. Magner would not haue a problem D�-qyo LEGISLAT'IVE HEARING MINLTfES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 9 with a short e}rtension, although siac months may not be feasible at this time unless a bond is posted. Mr. Strathman concurred saying that this nuisance building cannot stand indefinitely. Mr. Kratz stated he lives half a mile away. He has met all the neighbors. All the problems they had were with the previous owner. He has given them all his cazd, and they know who to call if there is a problem. He does not anticipate there will be more complaints. He does not want to knock it down so soon because his wsts go up so much. He would have to haul in fill to fill up the hole and there is too much fill on the side already that he has to haul out when the new building is built. Gerry Strathman laid over to the November 6, 2001, Legislative Hearing. In that time, the owner should be prepared to post a bond and rehabilitate the property or be prepazed to remove it. Summary Abatement Order Appeal for 1598 Hazel Street North. Walter Montpetit, owner, appeazed and stated tlus is regazding a wildlife gazden on lus property. It is 1,500 square feet. He has a 100 square foot patch sepazated. It is part of the landscaping scheme on his property. He received an order to cut it. It is in the backyazd. Gerry Strathman stated he has some remembrance about the City amending its notice to make provisions for native plantings. He asked would this qualify. Mr. Robinson responded he is not sure the norice stipulated what plantings could be in a native habitat. Sandy Pappas has been designated by an organization to determine what plants should be put in. Mr. Montpetit says that Harriet Island has azeas that look like the same type of scheme he is doing. Mr. Strathman asked is there someone on City staffthat can look at this properry. Mr. Robinson responded he has a name and phone number of the organization in charge of this issue. Just ta11 grass and weeds do not qualify. Gerry Strathman recommends laying over to the September 25, 2001, Legislative Hearings In the meantime, someone who lrnows about this issue can go to the property and make a deternunation. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1124 Conway Street. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the property.) (Steve Magner submitted photographs.) Steve Magner reported this properiy has been vacant since February 2, 1998. The owner is deceased. Ten smnmary abatement notices have been issued for vacant building, cut tall grass, remove unlawfully pazked vehicle, remove rubbish, and secure structure. On July 20, 2001, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building o� -qqc LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 10 was issued on July 24, 2001, with a compliance date of August 8, 2001. A bond has not been posted. The cost to repair is $40,000 to $50,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000. The building was condemned by the Sewer Division. The properry has a septic tank, wluch collapsed. The property was cottdemned. When the owner purchased the property, he failed to check with the City. The City is not allowing any new sewer systems be installed. The owner would i�ave to connect to the ne�rt closest City sewer, which could cost up to $45,000. Before he died, he said he woutd let the properry go back to the mortgage company and he would not do the connecrion. He stayed at the properry as long as he could. Mr. Magner stated he and Mr. Robinson cut the owner more slack because he was in a ternunal condition. Gerry Strathman recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 245 Front Avenue. If the owner faiLs to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (I�io one appeazed to represent the property. Photographs were submitted.) Steve Magner reported this properiy has been vacant since July 13, 2000. Seven summary abatement notices have been issued for cut tall grass, secure structure, and remove rubbish. On June 26, 2001, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on July 11, 2001, with a compliance date of August 10. The vacant building fee are due. T�ation has placed an esrimated mazket value of $22,600 on the properiy; estimated cost to repair, $75,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. As of September 4, 2001, a code compliance inspection has not been applied for, and a$2,000 bond has not been posted. Gerry Strathman recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 62 Winifred Street West If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the property.) Steve Magner this properiy has been vacant since July 30, 1990. There have been 20 summary abatement notices to remove refuse, cut tali grass, secure building, remove snow and ice, remove 16 vehicies/trailers, and allow occupancy of a registered vacant building. On December 22, 1999, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on January 4, 2000,with a compliance date of February 15, 2Q00. The vacant building fees are due. Real estate t�es are unpaid in the amount of $1,659.92. A bond was forfeited on June 13, 2001. The estimated cost to repair is $25,000. There was a previous resolution to repair or remove the property; the resolution was passed by the City Council. A new owner purchased the building the next day. The City Council amended the resolution to give the new owner 180 days. They failed to fuush the project. Mr. Magner has had little or no response from the owner, and he is disappointed the owner is not here today. O l-��o LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 11 Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 291 Tonnine (JO105� Hazold Robinson recommended the assessment be deleted. Gerry Strathman recommends deleting the assessment. The meeting was adjoumed at 11:43 a.m. � Council File # 0 l- 9q0 RESOLUTION Presented By Referred To Green Sheet # �0.135D G7 4� Committee: Date 2 4 5 6 7 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 WHEREAS, Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement has requested the City Council to hold public hearings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or wrecking and removal of a one-story, concrete block, wood frazne, structure (formerly a gas station) and the attached, auto repair bays located on properiy hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Properiy" and commonly known as 62 Wimfred Street West. This properiy is legally described as follows, to wit: Lot 4, Merrill's Subdivision of the West 1/2 of Block 79, West Saint Paul Proper. WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or befare May 13, 2001, the following are the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Capitol City Construction, Attn: Andrew W. Bravo, 216 Morton, Street, St. Paul, MN 55107 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 WHEREAS, this order informed the then known interested or responsible parties that the shucture located on the Subject Property is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and WHEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or demolish the structure located on the Subject Property by February 13, 2000; and WHEREAS, the enfarcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condirion; subject to demolition; and WHEREAS, 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 Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the public hearings; and WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City Council on Tuesday, September 4, 2001 to hear testimony and evidence, and after receiving testunony and evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested ar responsible parties to make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with ali applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of the struchxre to be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing; and 0�-1qo 2 3 4 5 6 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 45 46 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, September 19, 2001 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was considered by the Council; now therefare 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 62 Wurifred Street West: 1. � 3. Q Q That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paui 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 lrnown responsible parties to correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the buiiding(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected. That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placard on the Subject Property which declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition. That this building has been routinely monitored by the Citizen Service Offices, Division of Code Enforcement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings. That the known interested parties and owners aze as previousiy stated in this resolution and that the notificarion requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled. �� • The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order: The above referenced interested or responsible parties shall make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating tlus shucture and correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accardance with all applicable codes and ordinances, or in the altemative by demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ardinances. The rehabilitation or demolition and removal of the structure must be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing. 2. If the above corrective action is not completed within this period of time the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enfarcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to demolish and remove this shucture, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject 0�-9�0 Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. � 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal property or fi�ctures of any kind which interfere with the demolirion and removal shall be removed firom the property by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If all personal property is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shall 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. Adopted by Councii: Date w_.-�,... �y a � �, , Adoption Certified by Council Secretary � �.� � -�� . � �.- I.% i //� ♦ � �/L // Requested by Department of: Cirizen Service Office; Code Enforcement B y . ' J� 2 ---�' ` �� Form Approved by City Attorney Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: �,��;�� V o�-91c GREEN SHEET No 102350 � � 1 �.,� _- ,_ �.�.,a - -_ �� ir!'.! L�7 TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES ��. ��. �wvde�e�ansnw�} ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCA O�SIGNATUR� ty,�ounci�to pass this resolution which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If ; owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is ordered remove the building. The subject property is located at 62 Winifred Street West. � PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB CAMMRTEE qVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Has this P�Mrm e�arwrorked untler a contract tarthis-dePa�enl? VES NO Fies tnis P��m ever been a cily emyloyee9 YES NO Dces Mis Pa��m possess a sidll not nnmalNPO� �' anY cunmt citY emWoYee9 YES NO' Is Mis persorUfirm a tafpeted veiMoR . � VE5 NO �''"s`�u�uig s i a n�uisanc� c�hi "�`g�s �e�"i`�ed in Chapter 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paui Legislarive Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties lrnown to the Enforcement Officer were given an order to repair or remove the building at 62 Winifred Street West by February 15, 2000, and have failed to comply with those orders. •--. �. The City will eliminate a nuisance. )ISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to "the property, 71S4OVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED � A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will continue to blight the community. AoUNT OF TRANSAC170N 1 $9 ,000 - $10,000 � Nuisance Housing Abatement souRCe Coux� �arch Centee AUG 212061 COSTrttEVR1UEBUD6ETED(qRCLEONE) � 33261 �crnm N�Ere NO CITIZEN SERVICE OFfICE Fred Avusu, Ciry C(erk �I '�lRo DMSION OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT Mich¢el R Morehead Pra.¢ram Mana,¢er CTI`Y OF SAR�IT PAUL Norm Coleman, Mayor Nuisance Building Code Enforcement IS W. Kellogg8[vd. Rm. 190 Tei: 651-2668440 Saint Pau1, MN55702 ` Faz: 651-26b8426 E�ll�llSt 1�� 2��1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Catizen Service Office, Vacant/Nuisance Buildin�s Enforcement Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution ordering the repair or removal of the nuisance building(s) located at: : 62 Winifred Street West The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows: Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, September 4, 2001 City Council Hearing - Wednesday,:September 19, 2001 The owners and responsible parties of record are: Name and Last Known Address Capitol City Consixuction Atin: Andrew W. Bravo 216 Morton Street Interest Fee Owner St. Paul, MN 55107 The legal description of this property is: Lot 4, Memll's Subdivision of the West'/z of Block 79, West Saint Paul Proper. 62 Wuufred Street West au�st io, aooi Pa�e 2 0�-99a Division of Code Enforcement has declazed this building(s) to constitute a"nuisance" as defined by Le�islarive Code, Chapter 45. Division of Code Enforcement has issued an order to the then lmown responsible parties to eliminate this nuisance condirion by correctin� the deficiencies or by razing and removing this buildina(s). Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied witYt the nuisance condition remains unabated, the community continues to suffer the bli;hting influence of this properiy. 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 buildin� in a timely manner, and failing that, authorize the Division of Code Enforcement to proceed to demolition and removal, and to assess the costs incurred against the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as taxes. Sincerely, Steve �Vlagner =• Steve Magner Vacant Buildings Supervisor Division of Code Enforcement Citizen Service Office SM:ml cc: Frank Berg, Building Inspection and Desi� Meghan Riley, City Attomeys Office Nancy Anderson, Assistant Secretary to the Council Laurie Kaplan, PED-Housing Division ccnph REPORT Date: September 4, 2001 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Room 330 City Ha11 15 West Kellogg Boulevazd LEGISLATIVE HEARING Gerry Strathman Legislafive Hearing Officer ►� Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the properry at 393 Sidnev Street East. If the owner faiis to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Laid over from 8-7-01) Legislative Hearing Officer recomxnends laying over to the October 2, 2001, Legislative Hearing. Summary Abatements J0102B Grass cutting (by private contractor) during June and part of July 2001; JOl O5A Properry cleanup during June and part of July 2001; J0104B Boarding up of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; J0104C Demolition of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; and JOl O5V Abandoned vehicles towed from private properiy during June and part of 3uly 2001. 579 Van Buren Avenue (JOlOSV) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 1119 Geranium Avenue East (J0104B) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 422 Jessamine Avenue East (JOlOSV) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 811 Van Buren Avenue (30102G) Legislative Hearing Oi�icer recommends approval of the assessment. 456 Lawson Avenue West (JOl O5A) Legislarive Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 555 Blair Avenue (JOlOSA) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. � ► -990 914 Concordia Avenue (JOlOSA) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. oi-Y�a LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 2 250 Page Street East (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approvai of the assessment. 1595 Thomas Avenue (JO105� Legislative Hearin� Off cer recommends deleting the assessment. 639 Blair Avenue (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing O�cer recommends approval of the assessment 408 Banfil Street (JOl O5A) Mr. Strathman recommends reducing the assessment to $50 plus the $45 service fee for a total assessment of $95. 657 Dale Street North (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 324 Jenks Avenue (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 462 Edmund Avenue (JO105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 967 E�erton Street (JO105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 65 Winnipeg Avenue (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 65 Winnipe2 Avenue (70105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 605 Masnolia Avenue East (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 291 Tonnin2 (JO105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 3. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the properry at 847 Le�n t�on Pazkway 5outh. If the owner faiis to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the November 6, 2001, Legislative Hearing. LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 � 5. :� Summary Abatement Order Appeal for 1598 Hazel Street North. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the September 25, 2001, Legislative Hearing. Page 3 0►-9qD Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1124 Conwav Street. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 245 Front Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 62 Winifred Street West. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. 0 MINLTTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING Tuesday, September 4, 2001 Room 330 City Hall Gerry Strathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Steve Magner, Code Enforcement; Harold Robinson, Code Enforcement Gerry Sirathman called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 393 Sidney Street East. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Laid over from 8-7-01) 01-990 Steve Magner reported 11us was laid over in order for the attorney representing the fee owner and Lutheran Social Services to sell the property. The attomey submitted to Mr. Magner a proposal to sell the property to the West Side Neighborhood Development Alliance. They are waiting for the closing and have to obtain a code compliance inspection. Mr. Magner suggested this matter be laid over for the closing of the sell and so NEDA can obtaiu a bond. George F. Borer appeazed to request an ea�tension of a month in order to close on the property. The probate court approved the sell this moming. The other status was cleazed up earlier. Gerry Stratl�man laid over this matter to October 2, 2001, in order for NEDA to close on the property. Summary Abatements J0102B Grass cutting (by private contractor) during June and part of July 2U01; J0105A Property cleanup during June and part of July 2001; J0104B Boarding up of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; J0104C Demolition of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; and JOlOSV Abandoned vehicles towed from private property during June and part of July 2001. 579 Van Buren Avenue (JOlOSV) (No one appeared to represent the property.) Gerry Stratlmian recommends approval. 1119 Geranium Avenue East (J0104B) (No one appeared to represent the properiy.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 2 422 Jessamine Avenue East (JO105� (No one appeared to represent the proper[y.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 811 Van Buren Avenue (J0102G) (No one appeared to represent the properiy.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 456 Lawson Avenue West (JOl O5A) (No one appeared to represent the properry.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 555 Blair Avenue (JOl O5A) O► �-99� Steve Plowman, Real Estate Broker, 386 Wabasha Street North, appeared and stated he was asked by the owners to check into this. They were unawaze what this charge was for. The property has been condemned. People were hired to clean out the property, which was completed yesterday. The owner of the company that did the cleaning is interested in purchasing the property. The owners are willing to get rid of the properry for what they owe on it or even a little less. Gerry Strathman stated his information is that orders were sent on May 17, 2001, to clean up fiuniture, refuse, bike pazts by May 29. The inspector went out again on May 30, deternuned the cleanup did not take place, and ordered the City to do it. The City crew went out on 7une 6. The total chazge is $288.00. Mr. Strathman stated he could see the videotape. Mr. Plowman responded that is not necessary because the property was a problem. Gerry Strathman recommends approval of the assessment 914 Concordia Avenue (JOl O5A) Meredith Price, National Mazketing, 12249 Nicollet Avenue South, Burnsville, appeared and stated they never received notice that there was going to be an abatement proceeding. Her understanding is that it was sent to the wrong party. This was a vacant house. It was under renovation. National Marketing took it over, and hauled out three dumpsters of refuse. The items cleaned up by the City were not theirs. Some of the things cleaned up were not on her properiy; there is an empty lot next door. Her company has the crews to do ttris work. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 3 Gerry Strathman stated the information he has is that orders were mailed on 7une 12, 2001; he �) � R � asked who it was sent to. Hatold Robinson responded orders were mailed on June 12 to Ameriquest and to the occupant at 914 Concordia At the time, Ameriquest was listed as the owner. Code Enforcement did not get any mail rehuned. Ms. Price responded that her company acquired the property in Mazch Ramsey County may be behind in their updating. Mr. Strathman asked was the sell recorded. Ms. Price responded yes and they have title lncnian�, Mr. Strathman asked who was living there in 7une. Ms. Price responded no one. It was unfit for habitation. It had to be gutted. Gerry Strathman deleted the assessment on the basis of incorrect notificafion. The City did what it was suppose to do, but it is evident that Code Enforcement received incorrect information from Ramsey County regazding ownerslup. 250 Page Sh�eet East (JOlOSA) (No one appeazed to represem the property.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 1595 Thomas Avenue (JOlOSV) The following appeazed: Terry Glanz and Cnreg Glanz, owners. Terry stated three cars were towed offthe property. Hazold Itobinson reported the vehicles appeared inoperable and no licenses were visible. If a vehicle has been sitting in one place for a long time, the inspector considers it inoperable, but the velucles cleazly had no visible licenses. Terry L. Glanz was notified at 1595 Thomas Avenue. Orders were mailed on January 25, 2001. Mr. Strathman asked what they have to show that the vehicles were licensed. Terry Glanz responded he has paperwork and lus brother went through the process of getting license plates and tabs after the notices were received. They have insurance waivers. Mr. Strathman asked when did they get them licensed. Greg Glanz responded they were licensed the year before all this took place. He had the license plates on the vehicle, he took them off, and put them inside the vehicle in the window. There was a problem with license piates being stolen off of cars. This happened when there was a lot of snow. He knocked the snow off the windows so they were visible. Mr. Strathman stated once the vehicles were towed, why were they not retrieved. Terry Glanz responded he did not hy because he did not l�ow lus brother had insurance waivers. His brother said a few weeks later that he had insurance waivers and the vehicles were legally licensed but LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 4 Ol-190 could not be driven. One of the vehicles was operable. There was a transmission and engine being worked on. The Horizon was waiting for an engine also. The Glanzes showed Mr. Strathman some documents showing the vehicles were licensed, the insurance waiver, and photographs. Gerry Strathman deleted the assessment. 639 Blair Avenue (JOl O5A) (No one appeazed to represent the properry.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 408 Banfil Street (JOl O5A) Kimie Kearney, owner, appeazed and stated she has a$288 assessment for yard cleanup and she wanted to know what was done. (A videotape was shown.) Ms. Kearney stated it was four bags of recycled cans for $288. She had mowed the yazd and she is letting the bushes grow a bit. Mr. Strathman stated the storage of trash in the bags was not in compliance with City codes; they need to be in containers. Ms. Keazney responded it was her granddaughter's recycling. Ms. Kearney had taken them out of the garage so they could be taken to the recyciing place. Mr. Strathman reduced the assessment to $50 plus the $45 service fee for a total assessment of $95. The City crew did go out, and there were some things improperly stored; however, the situation did not look that bad on the videotape. 657 Dale Street North (J0105A) Michael Burger, owner, 915 Reed Street, Mankato, appeazed and stated this property and two others were in a partnership between himself and someone else. On Februasy 27, 2001, they mutually agreed to end their partnership. These properties were in Mr. Burger's name. He did a quick claim deed and put them all in the other person's name. The property probabiy did need to be cleaned up, but at the tnne he was not responsible for the pmperties. He is not currently the owner. Mr. Strathman asked who was notified. Mr. Berger responded it was mailed to 1107 Jenks. That mail was returned to the City. The City mailed it to another address. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 5 O I -'It0 Hazold Robinson reported the last time there was an abatement at that address was June 29. Their records still show Michael Burger at 1107 Jenks. Mr. Robinson suggested that Mr. Burger deal with Taa�ation or the former partner to make sure the records get transferred. Crerry Strathman recommends approval of the assessment. 324 Jenks Avenue (JOl O5A) Jean Johnson, 5000 Otter Lake Road, White Bear, appeazed and stated they were on a contract for deed at the time tlus occurred. The information went to Charles Zeches because that name was still on it. She asked when this was done. Mr. Strathman responded the notice was sent on May 10, 2001, and the work was done on May 29. Ms. Johnson stated a tenant handed her paperwork on approximately May 30. It did need cleaning. She looked at the backyazd after she was handed the notice, and there were mattresses and gazbage there. Mr. Strathman asked who was notified. Hazold Robinson responded "OccupanY' at 324 Jenks and Chazles Zeches at 777 Sia�th Street East. Gerry Strathman recommended approval of the assessment. The City notified the owner of record. The occupant was also notified, which goes beyond what is required. There was an 18 day period beriveen when she was notified and the City actually did the cleanup. 462 Edmund Avenue (JOlOSV) The following appeazed: Wanda Bulditz, 7062 19th Street North, Oakdale; Marie Keyes, 462 Edmund Avenue # 1; and Heriberto Gazrido, owner, 7062 19th Street North, Oakdale. Ms. Bulditz stated she got a notice regarding a vehicle removed from hez property. She wanted to know why because she gave her tenant permission to pazk a vehicle there. A week later, the caz was not there so Ms. Bulditz assumed the vehicle was never parked there. Then, she got a bill. Ms. Keyes stated this was her daughter's caz. She called the Police Department Impound lot. No one admitted to having the car. The tabs were good, and the caz was operable. Ms. Keyes had no need to drive the vehicie so she parked it at the property. It was not even there three days. She brought the caz there Monday night. When she came home on Thursday, the vehicle was gone. Mr. Robinson stated the inspection was done on January 26, 2001. The vehicle had an expired license. The recheck was done on February 2 and an impound order was sent in. The police towed it on February 20 with the license still expired. Mr. Strathman asked did she not get the caz because she did not know where it was located. Ms. Keyes responded no one would tell her that it was towed. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 6 �l� Mr. Strathman asked what triggered this inspection. Hazold Robinson responded probably a complaint It was towed by the police department. Mr. Strathman deleted the assessment. He is unsure why the Impound Lot did not tell the owner the car was there. Ms. Bulditz stated she is a real estate agent and lmows that Ramsey County is six months behind in their record keeping. 967 Edgerton Street (JO105� Aleaiis Abreu, owner, appeared and stated this vehicle belonged to a tenant that lived at the properiy. The tenant bought the vehicle, stored it in the garage for a while, then moved it out. Some items were missing from the property. Mr. Abreu was going to hold this vehicle to see if he would come back_ The car did not start and he had keys. Mr. Abreu called a police officer that is a friend of lus. This police officer ticketed the caz fust. He said he would come back later, and if the vehicle is still there, he would have it moved. A few days later, the vehicle was gone, and Mr. Abreu assumed this officer took it. Later, this officer asked what happened to the vehicle, and Mr. Abreu received a bill in the mail. Mr. Strathman asked when the orders were mailed. Mr. Robinson responded orders were mailed twice: January 24, 2001, and Febn�ary 12 to Ale�ris Abreu and the occupant, both of 967 Edgerton. Mr. Abreu stated when he got the January notice, that is when he called his friend who ticketed the vehicle. Mr. Strathman asked if the police officer had ordered the vehicle towed, would the assessment go to the properry owner. Mr. Robinson responded it would be an administrative tow. The car is cited, towed, and the vehicle owner has to recover the vehicle. Steve Magner stated the property owner has to be present during an administrative tow to identify the vehicle. Mr. Robinson stated if he had said to the inspector that a police officer is working on this and it would be towed in a few days, there would not have been a problem. Gerry Strathman recommends deleting the assessment. 65 Winnipe¢ Avenue (JOlOSA) 65 Winni�ee Avenue (JOlOSV) Milt Randall, tenant, appeazed and stated the owner lives in Wisconsin and Mr. Randall feels he is responsible for what happens at the properry. There are two assessments here. One involves a vehicle that was towed and the other assessment is for a cleanup. (The cieanup was discussed first.) During the time of this assessment, said Mr. Randall, he was in the process of switching trash companies. For a month, he had to call his trash company because they were not picking it up. Then he got the assessment. He thought the company had finally taken the trash, but the Ciiy had 6 � �q'�o LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 page '7 instead. The assessment was sent to Wisconsin. By the time it got to Mr. Randall, he did not have time to do anything. (A videotape was shown.) Mr- Randall stated kids strip bikes and throw them in the rear of his house. The appliances came from lus house and were suppose to be picked up by the trash company. Gerry Strathman stated the owner was notified, the occupant received notice, and it was almost two weeks between the time notice was sent and the City did the cleanup. There was opportunity for someone to do the cleanup. Mr. Robinson stated orders went out on May 15, and a reinspection was done on May 23. The occupants supposedly called the inspector on May 23 to say he would take care of it by the weekend. The inspector went over there on May 30, the items were still there, so he issued the work order. (Now, the vehicles were discussed.) Gerry Strathman asked about the vehicles. Mr. Randall responded the inspector told him he had to move the cazs. He put one in the garage and the other right beside the garage on the slab. The inspector told him the plates were not current so he could not pazk it there. Mr. Randall put insurance on the car and current plates. Three days later, the caz was towed. The tabs were on the velucle when it was towed. He purchased the tabs the day after he received the notice. Mr. Strathinan stated orders were mailed on Januazy 18, the inspector went out an February 5, and again on February 21. Mr. Strathman asked did he have anything showing the vehicle had current piates. Mr. Randall responded he did not have anythiug with him. Mr. Strathman asked when the vehicle was towed. Mr. Robinson responded he was not sure when it was towed. JOl O5A - Mr. Strathman recommends approval of the assessment. 'The two appliances cleazly had been stored there. The owner had more than two weeks to get rid of them. J0105V - Mr. Strathman recoxnmends deleting the assessment ifthe owner can get him something showing the vehicle had legal tabs and legal plates when it was towed in February. If the owner cannot supply him with that, then the assessment stands. NOTE: Mr. Randall did bring in evidence that he purchased tabs on February 24, 2001. Upon checking with the Impound Lot, it was found that the vehicle arrived there on Mazch 3. Therefore, Gerry Strathman recommends deleting the assessment. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 605 Mag.nolia Avenue East (JOl O5A) 01—`t'�o Page 8 Mel Guyett, owner, appeazed and stated he purchased the properry recently. A fence was installed and bushes were removed. He was making azrangements to haul them away. He works about 12 hours a day and he could only do it on the weekend. He came home with a truck and a trailer to take it out of there. He has a friend who will sometimes do surprise things for him. Mr. Guyett thought this friend had done the work.. Mr. Strathman asked who was notified. Mr. Robinson responded Todd K. and Mary Kay Lewis were noiified at 605 Magnolia This was done on May 15, 2001, rechecked on May 12, and the work was done on May 29. Mr. Strathman asked when he became the owner. Mr. Guyett responded about July 7, 2001. Mr. Robinson responded the orders went out May 15. Gerry Strathman recommends approval of the assessment. When the owner purchased the property, he became responsible for the assessment. The seller is required to certify that there aze no pending assessments. If there are, the owner is suppose to take caze of them. The owner has the right to go to the previous owner because they aze responsible for it. Mr. Magner added that tifle insurance should cover things like this. Resolnrion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 84'7 Le�eington Parkwav South. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Mr. Magner showed photographs to Mr. Strathman.) John Kratz, owner, 1424 Edgcumbe Road, appeared and stated he just acquired this property on August 1. He would like to lay over this matter and wouid like to attach this property to another property adjacent to it. He would like to build a 12 unit townhouse. If that gets approved, this property will be torn down. The approval process is lengthy on this. He would like to do this in the fall. It is more likely to be six months. Given his plan to remove the building and given that the properry is a biight, Gerry Strathman asked, what is ihe problem with the property being removed now. Mr. Kratz responded his plan would be to rehabilitate the building if his plan is not approved. These matters can be highly chazged with neighborhood involvement. This property seems to be getting off to a friendlier start with the neighbors and he is more optimistic about the development. Steve Magner reported the properry has been vacant since Mazch l, 2000. Eight siunmary abatement notices have been issued to secure the house, cut tall grass, remove t.v. antenna, and remove hazardous mud and sand on sidewalk. On June 19, 2001, an inspecfion of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which consritute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. P,n order to abate a nuisance building was issued on July 11, 2001, with a compliance date of August 10. The vacant building fees aze paid. A code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a bond has not been posted. Estimated cost to repair is $80,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000. Mr. Magner would not haue a problem D�-qyo LEGISLAT'IVE HEARING MINLTfES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 9 with a short e}rtension, although siac months may not be feasible at this time unless a bond is posted. Mr. Strathman concurred saying that this nuisance building cannot stand indefinitely. Mr. Kratz stated he lives half a mile away. He has met all the neighbors. All the problems they had were with the previous owner. He has given them all his cazd, and they know who to call if there is a problem. He does not anticipate there will be more complaints. He does not want to knock it down so soon because his wsts go up so much. He would have to haul in fill to fill up the hole and there is too much fill on the side already that he has to haul out when the new building is built. Gerry Strathman laid over to the November 6, 2001, Legislative Hearing. In that time, the owner should be prepared to post a bond and rehabilitate the property or be prepazed to remove it. Summary Abatement Order Appeal for 1598 Hazel Street North. Walter Montpetit, owner, appeazed and stated tlus is regazding a wildlife gazden on lus property. It is 1,500 square feet. He has a 100 square foot patch sepazated. It is part of the landscaping scheme on his property. He received an order to cut it. It is in the backyazd. Gerry Strathman stated he has some remembrance about the City amending its notice to make provisions for native plantings. He asked would this qualify. Mr. Robinson responded he is not sure the norice stipulated what plantings could be in a native habitat. Sandy Pappas has been designated by an organization to determine what plants should be put in. Mr. Montpetit says that Harriet Island has azeas that look like the same type of scheme he is doing. Mr. Strathman asked is there someone on City staffthat can look at this properry. Mr. Robinson responded he has a name and phone number of the organization in charge of this issue. Just ta11 grass and weeds do not qualify. Gerry Strathman recommends laying over to the September 25, 2001, Legislative Hearings In the meantime, someone who lrnows about this issue can go to the property and make a deternunation. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1124 Conway Street. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the property.) (Steve Magner submitted photographs.) Steve Magner reported this properiy has been vacant since February 2, 1998. The owner is deceased. Ten smnmary abatement notices have been issued for vacant building, cut tall grass, remove unlawfully pazked vehicle, remove rubbish, and secure structure. On July 20, 2001, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building o� -qqc LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 10 was issued on July 24, 2001, with a compliance date of August 8, 2001. A bond has not been posted. The cost to repair is $40,000 to $50,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000. The building was condemned by the Sewer Division. The properry has a septic tank, wluch collapsed. The property was cottdemned. When the owner purchased the property, he failed to check with the City. The City is not allowing any new sewer systems be installed. The owner would i�ave to connect to the ne�rt closest City sewer, which could cost up to $45,000. Before he died, he said he woutd let the properry go back to the mortgage company and he would not do the connecrion. He stayed at the properry as long as he could. Mr. Magner stated he and Mr. Robinson cut the owner more slack because he was in a ternunal condition. Gerry Strathman recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 245 Front Avenue. If the owner faiLs to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (I�io one appeazed to represent the property. Photographs were submitted.) Steve Magner reported this properiy has been vacant since July 13, 2000. Seven summary abatement notices have been issued for cut tall grass, secure structure, and remove rubbish. On June 26, 2001, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on July 11, 2001, with a compliance date of August 10. The vacant building fee are due. T�ation has placed an esrimated mazket value of $22,600 on the properiy; estimated cost to repair, $75,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. As of September 4, 2001, a code compliance inspection has not been applied for, and a$2,000 bond has not been posted. Gerry Strathman recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 62 Winifred Street West If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the property.) Steve Magner this properiy has been vacant since July 30, 1990. There have been 20 summary abatement notices to remove refuse, cut tali grass, secure building, remove snow and ice, remove 16 vehicies/trailers, and allow occupancy of a registered vacant building. On December 22, 1999, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on January 4, 2000,with a compliance date of February 15, 2Q00. The vacant building fees are due. Real estate t�es are unpaid in the amount of $1,659.92. A bond was forfeited on June 13, 2001. The estimated cost to repair is $25,000. There was a previous resolution to repair or remove the property; the resolution was passed by the City Council. A new owner purchased the building the next day. The City Council amended the resolution to give the new owner 180 days. They failed to fuush the project. Mr. Magner has had little or no response from the owner, and he is disappointed the owner is not here today. O l-��o LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 11 Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 291 Tonnine (JO105� Hazold Robinson recommended the assessment be deleted. Gerry Strathman recommends deleting the assessment. The meeting was adjoumed at 11:43 a.m. � Council File # 0 l- 9q0 RESOLUTION Presented By Referred To Green Sheet # �0.135D G7 4� Committee: Date 2 4 5 6 7 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 WHEREAS, Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement has requested the City Council to hold public hearings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or wrecking and removal of a one-story, concrete block, wood frazne, structure (formerly a gas station) and the attached, auto repair bays located on properiy hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Properiy" and commonly known as 62 Wimfred Street West. This properiy is legally described as follows, to wit: Lot 4, Merrill's Subdivision of the West 1/2 of Block 79, West Saint Paul Proper. WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or befare May 13, 2001, the following are the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Capitol City Construction, Attn: Andrew W. Bravo, 216 Morton, Street, St. Paul, MN 55107 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 WHEREAS, this order informed the then known interested or responsible parties that the shucture located on the Subject Property is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and WHEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or demolish the structure located on the Subject Property by February 13, 2000; and WHEREAS, the enfarcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condirion; subject to demolition; and WHEREAS, 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 Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the public hearings; and WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City Council on Tuesday, September 4, 2001 to hear testimony and evidence, and after receiving testunony and evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested ar responsible parties to make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with ali applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of the struchxre to be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing; and 0�-1qo 2 3 4 5 6 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 45 46 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, September 19, 2001 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was considered by the Council; now therefare 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 62 Wurifred Street West: 1. � 3. Q Q That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paui 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 lrnown responsible parties to correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the buiiding(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected. That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placard on the Subject Property which declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition. That this building has been routinely monitored by the Citizen Service Offices, Division of Code Enforcement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings. That the known interested parties and owners aze as previousiy stated in this resolution and that the notificarion requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled. �� • The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order: The above referenced interested or responsible parties shall make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating tlus shucture and correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accardance with all applicable codes and ordinances, or in the altemative by demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ardinances. The rehabilitation or demolition and removal of the structure must be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing. 2. If the above corrective action is not completed within this period of time the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enfarcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to demolish and remove this shucture, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject 0�-9�0 Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. � 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal property or fi�ctures of any kind which interfere with the demolirion and removal shall be removed firom the property by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If all personal property is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shall 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. Adopted by Councii: Date w_.-�,... �y a � �, , Adoption Certified by Council Secretary � �.� � -�� . � �.- I.% i //� ♦ � �/L // Requested by Department of: Cirizen Service Office; Code Enforcement B y . ' J� 2 ---�' ` �� Form Approved by City Attorney Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: �,��;�� V o�-91c GREEN SHEET No 102350 � � 1 �.,� _- ,_ �.�.,a - -_ �� ir!'.! L�7 TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES ��. ��. �wvde�e�ansnw�} ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCA O�SIGNATUR� ty,�ounci�to pass this resolution which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If ; owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is ordered remove the building. The subject property is located at 62 Winifred Street West. � PLANNING CAMMISSION CIB CAMMRTEE qVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Has this P�Mrm e�arwrorked untler a contract tarthis-dePa�enl? VES NO Fies tnis P��m ever been a cily emyloyee9 YES NO Dces Mis Pa��m possess a sidll not nnmalNPO� �' anY cunmt citY emWoYee9 YES NO' Is Mis persorUfirm a tafpeted veiMoR . � VE5 NO �''"s`�u�uig s i a n�uisanc� c�hi "�`g�s �e�"i`�ed in Chapter 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paui Legislarive Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties lrnown to the Enforcement Officer were given an order to repair or remove the building at 62 Winifred Street West by February 15, 2000, and have failed to comply with those orders. •--. �. The City will eliminate a nuisance. )ISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to "the property, 71S4OVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED � A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will continue to blight the community. AoUNT OF TRANSAC170N 1 $9 ,000 - $10,000 � Nuisance Housing Abatement souRCe Coux� �arch Centee AUG 212061 COSTrttEVR1UEBUD6ETED(qRCLEONE) � 33261 �crnm N�Ere NO CITIZEN SERVICE OFfICE Fred Avusu, Ciry C(erk �I '�lRo DMSION OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT Mich¢el R Morehead Pra.¢ram Mana,¢er CTI`Y OF SAR�IT PAUL Norm Coleman, Mayor Nuisance Building Code Enforcement IS W. Kellogg8[vd. Rm. 190 Tei: 651-2668440 Saint Pau1, MN55702 ` Faz: 651-26b8426 E�ll�llSt 1�� 2��1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Catizen Service Office, Vacant/Nuisance Buildin�s Enforcement Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution ordering the repair or removal of the nuisance building(s) located at: : 62 Winifred Street West The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows: Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, September 4, 2001 City Council Hearing - Wednesday,:September 19, 2001 The owners and responsible parties of record are: Name and Last Known Address Capitol City Consixuction Atin: Andrew W. Bravo 216 Morton Street Interest Fee Owner St. Paul, MN 55107 The legal description of this property is: Lot 4, Memll's Subdivision of the West'/z of Block 79, West Saint Paul Proper. 62 Wuufred Street West au�st io, aooi Pa�e 2 0�-99a Division of Code Enforcement has declazed this building(s) to constitute a"nuisance" as defined by Le�islarive Code, Chapter 45. Division of Code Enforcement has issued an order to the then lmown responsible parties to eliminate this nuisance condirion by correctin� the deficiencies or by razing and removing this buildina(s). Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied witYt the nuisance condition remains unabated, the community continues to suffer the bli;hting influence of this properiy. 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 buildin� in a timely manner, and failing that, authorize the Division of Code Enforcement to proceed to demolition and removal, and to assess the costs incurred against the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as taxes. Sincerely, Steve �Vlagner =• Steve Magner Vacant Buildings Supervisor Division of Code Enforcement Citizen Service Office SM:ml cc: Frank Berg, Building Inspection and Desi� Meghan Riley, City Attomeys Office Nancy Anderson, Assistant Secretary to the Council Laurie Kaplan, PED-Housing Division ccnph REPORT Date: September 4, 2001 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Room 330 City Ha11 15 West Kellogg Boulevazd LEGISLATIVE HEARING Gerry Strathman Legislafive Hearing Officer ►� Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the properry at 393 Sidnev Street East. If the owner faiis to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Laid over from 8-7-01) Legislative Hearing Officer recomxnends laying over to the October 2, 2001, Legislative Hearing. Summary Abatements J0102B Grass cutting (by private contractor) during June and part of July 2001; JOl O5A Properry cleanup during June and part of July 2001; J0104B Boarding up of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; J0104C Demolition of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; and JOl O5V Abandoned vehicles towed from private properiy during June and part of 3uly 2001. 579 Van Buren Avenue (JOlOSV) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 1119 Geranium Avenue East (J0104B) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 422 Jessamine Avenue East (JOlOSV) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 811 Van Buren Avenue (30102G) Legislative Hearing Oi�icer recommends approval of the assessment. 456 Lawson Avenue West (JOl O5A) Legislarive Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 555 Blair Avenue (JOlOSA) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. � ► -990 914 Concordia Avenue (JOlOSA) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. oi-Y�a LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 2 250 Page Street East (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approvai of the assessment. 1595 Thomas Avenue (JO105� Legislative Hearin� Off cer recommends deleting the assessment. 639 Blair Avenue (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing O�cer recommends approval of the assessment 408 Banfil Street (JOl O5A) Mr. Strathman recommends reducing the assessment to $50 plus the $45 service fee for a total assessment of $95. 657 Dale Street North (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 324 Jenks Avenue (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 462 Edmund Avenue (JO105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 967 E�erton Street (JO105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 65 Winnipeg Avenue (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 65 Winnipe2 Avenue (70105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 605 Masnolia Avenue East (JOl O5A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 291 Tonnin2 (JO105� Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment. 3. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the properry at 847 Le�n t�on Pazkway 5outh. If the owner faiis to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the November 6, 2001, Legislative Hearing. LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 � 5. :� Summary Abatement Order Appeal for 1598 Hazel Street North. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the September 25, 2001, Legislative Hearing. Page 3 0►-9qD Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1124 Conwav Street. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 245 Front Avenue. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 62 Winifred Street West. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. 0 MINLTTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING Tuesday, September 4, 2001 Room 330 City Hall Gerry Strathman, Legislative Hearing Officer STAFF PRESENT: Steve Magner, Code Enforcement; Harold Robinson, Code Enforcement Gerry Sirathman called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 393 Sidney Street East. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Laid over from 8-7-01) 01-990 Steve Magner reported 11us was laid over in order for the attorney representing the fee owner and Lutheran Social Services to sell the property. The attomey submitted to Mr. Magner a proposal to sell the property to the West Side Neighborhood Development Alliance. They are waiting for the closing and have to obtain a code compliance inspection. Mr. Magner suggested this matter be laid over for the closing of the sell and so NEDA can obtaiu a bond. George F. Borer appeazed to request an ea�tension of a month in order to close on the property. The probate court approved the sell this moming. The other status was cleazed up earlier. Gerry Stratl�man laid over this matter to October 2, 2001, in order for NEDA to close on the property. Summary Abatements J0102B Grass cutting (by private contractor) during June and part of July 2U01; J0105A Property cleanup during June and part of July 2001; J0104B Boarding up of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; J0104C Demolition of vacant buildings during June and part of July 2001; and JOlOSV Abandoned vehicles towed from private property during June and part of July 2001. 579 Van Buren Avenue (JOlOSV) (No one appeared to represent the property.) Gerry Stratlmian recommends approval. 1119 Geranium Avenue East (J0104B) (No one appeared to represent the properiy.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 2 422 Jessamine Avenue East (JO105� (No one appeared to represent the proper[y.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 811 Van Buren Avenue (J0102G) (No one appeared to represent the properiy.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 456 Lawson Avenue West (JOl O5A) (No one appeared to represent the properry.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 555 Blair Avenue (JOl O5A) O► �-99� Steve Plowman, Real Estate Broker, 386 Wabasha Street North, appeared and stated he was asked by the owners to check into this. They were unawaze what this charge was for. The property has been condemned. People were hired to clean out the property, which was completed yesterday. The owner of the company that did the cleaning is interested in purchasing the property. The owners are willing to get rid of the properry for what they owe on it or even a little less. Gerry Strathman stated his information is that orders were sent on May 17, 2001, to clean up fiuniture, refuse, bike pazts by May 29. The inspector went out again on May 30, deternuned the cleanup did not take place, and ordered the City to do it. The City crew went out on 7une 6. The total chazge is $288.00. Mr. Strathman stated he could see the videotape. Mr. Plowman responded that is not necessary because the property was a problem. Gerry Strathman recommends approval of the assessment 914 Concordia Avenue (JOl O5A) Meredith Price, National Mazketing, 12249 Nicollet Avenue South, Burnsville, appeared and stated they never received notice that there was going to be an abatement proceeding. Her understanding is that it was sent to the wrong party. This was a vacant house. It was under renovation. National Marketing took it over, and hauled out three dumpsters of refuse. The items cleaned up by the City were not theirs. Some of the things cleaned up were not on her properiy; there is an empty lot next door. Her company has the crews to do ttris work. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 3 Gerry Strathman stated the information he has is that orders were mailed on 7une 12, 2001; he �) � R � asked who it was sent to. Hatold Robinson responded orders were mailed on June 12 to Ameriquest and to the occupant at 914 Concordia At the time, Ameriquest was listed as the owner. Code Enforcement did not get any mail rehuned. Ms. Price responded that her company acquired the property in Mazch Ramsey County may be behind in their updating. Mr. Strathman asked was the sell recorded. Ms. Price responded yes and they have title lncnian�, Mr. Strathman asked who was living there in 7une. Ms. Price responded no one. It was unfit for habitation. It had to be gutted. Gerry Strathman deleted the assessment on the basis of incorrect notificafion. The City did what it was suppose to do, but it is evident that Code Enforcement received incorrect information from Ramsey County regazding ownerslup. 250 Page Sh�eet East (JOlOSA) (No one appeazed to represem the property.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 1595 Thomas Avenue (JOlOSV) The following appeazed: Terry Glanz and Cnreg Glanz, owners. Terry stated three cars were towed offthe property. Hazold Itobinson reported the vehicles appeared inoperable and no licenses were visible. If a vehicle has been sitting in one place for a long time, the inspector considers it inoperable, but the velucles cleazly had no visible licenses. Terry L. Glanz was notified at 1595 Thomas Avenue. Orders were mailed on January 25, 2001. Mr. Strathman asked what they have to show that the vehicles were licensed. Terry Glanz responded he has paperwork and lus brother went through the process of getting license plates and tabs after the notices were received. They have insurance waivers. Mr. Strathman asked when did they get them licensed. Greg Glanz responded they were licensed the year before all this took place. He had the license plates on the vehicle, he took them off, and put them inside the vehicle in the window. There was a problem with license piates being stolen off of cars. This happened when there was a lot of snow. He knocked the snow off the windows so they were visible. Mr. Strathman stated once the vehicles were towed, why were they not retrieved. Terry Glanz responded he did not hy because he did not l�ow lus brother had insurance waivers. His brother said a few weeks later that he had insurance waivers and the vehicles were legally licensed but LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 4 Ol-190 could not be driven. One of the vehicles was operable. There was a transmission and engine being worked on. The Horizon was waiting for an engine also. The Glanzes showed Mr. Strathman some documents showing the vehicles were licensed, the insurance waiver, and photographs. Gerry Strathman deleted the assessment. 639 Blair Avenue (JOl O5A) (No one appeazed to represent the properry.) Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 408 Banfil Street (JOl O5A) Kimie Kearney, owner, appeazed and stated she has a$288 assessment for yard cleanup and she wanted to know what was done. (A videotape was shown.) Ms. Kearney stated it was four bags of recycled cans for $288. She had mowed the yazd and she is letting the bushes grow a bit. Mr. Strathman stated the storage of trash in the bags was not in compliance with City codes; they need to be in containers. Ms. Keazney responded it was her granddaughter's recycling. Ms. Kearney had taken them out of the garage so they could be taken to the recyciing place. Mr. Strathman reduced the assessment to $50 plus the $45 service fee for a total assessment of $95. The City crew did go out, and there were some things improperly stored; however, the situation did not look that bad on the videotape. 657 Dale Street North (J0105A) Michael Burger, owner, 915 Reed Street, Mankato, appeazed and stated this property and two others were in a partnership between himself and someone else. On Februasy 27, 2001, they mutually agreed to end their partnership. These properties were in Mr. Burger's name. He did a quick claim deed and put them all in the other person's name. The property probabiy did need to be cleaned up, but at the tnne he was not responsible for the pmperties. He is not currently the owner. Mr. Strathman asked who was notified. Mr. Berger responded it was mailed to 1107 Jenks. That mail was returned to the City. The City mailed it to another address. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 5 O I -'It0 Hazold Robinson reported the last time there was an abatement at that address was June 29. Their records still show Michael Burger at 1107 Jenks. Mr. Robinson suggested that Mr. Burger deal with Taa�ation or the former partner to make sure the records get transferred. Crerry Strathman recommends approval of the assessment. 324 Jenks Avenue (JOl O5A) Jean Johnson, 5000 Otter Lake Road, White Bear, appeazed and stated they were on a contract for deed at the time tlus occurred. The information went to Charles Zeches because that name was still on it. She asked when this was done. Mr. Strathman responded the notice was sent on May 10, 2001, and the work was done on May 29. Ms. Johnson stated a tenant handed her paperwork on approximately May 30. It did need cleaning. She looked at the backyazd after she was handed the notice, and there were mattresses and gazbage there. Mr. Strathman asked who was notified. Hazold Robinson responded "OccupanY' at 324 Jenks and Chazles Zeches at 777 Sia�th Street East. Gerry Strathman recommended approval of the assessment. The City notified the owner of record. The occupant was also notified, which goes beyond what is required. There was an 18 day period beriveen when she was notified and the City actually did the cleanup. 462 Edmund Avenue (JOlOSV) The following appeazed: Wanda Bulditz, 7062 19th Street North, Oakdale; Marie Keyes, 462 Edmund Avenue # 1; and Heriberto Gazrido, owner, 7062 19th Street North, Oakdale. Ms. Bulditz stated she got a notice regarding a vehicle removed from hez property. She wanted to know why because she gave her tenant permission to pazk a vehicle there. A week later, the caz was not there so Ms. Bulditz assumed the vehicle was never parked there. Then, she got a bill. Ms. Keyes stated this was her daughter's caz. She called the Police Department Impound lot. No one admitted to having the car. The tabs were good, and the caz was operable. Ms. Keyes had no need to drive the vehicie so she parked it at the property. It was not even there three days. She brought the caz there Monday night. When she came home on Thursday, the vehicle was gone. Mr. Robinson stated the inspection was done on January 26, 2001. The vehicle had an expired license. The recheck was done on February 2 and an impound order was sent in. The police towed it on February 20 with the license still expired. Mr. Strathman asked did she not get the caz because she did not know where it was located. Ms. Keyes responded no one would tell her that it was towed. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 6 �l� Mr. Strathman asked what triggered this inspection. Hazold Robinson responded probably a complaint It was towed by the police department. Mr. Strathman deleted the assessment. He is unsure why the Impound Lot did not tell the owner the car was there. Ms. Bulditz stated she is a real estate agent and lmows that Ramsey County is six months behind in their record keeping. 967 Edgerton Street (JO105� Aleaiis Abreu, owner, appeared and stated this vehicle belonged to a tenant that lived at the properiy. The tenant bought the vehicle, stored it in the garage for a while, then moved it out. Some items were missing from the property. Mr. Abreu was going to hold this vehicle to see if he would come back_ The car did not start and he had keys. Mr. Abreu called a police officer that is a friend of lus. This police officer ticketed the caz fust. He said he would come back later, and if the vehicle is still there, he would have it moved. A few days later, the vehicle was gone, and Mr. Abreu assumed this officer took it. Later, this officer asked what happened to the vehicle, and Mr. Abreu received a bill in the mail. Mr. Strathman asked when the orders were mailed. Mr. Robinson responded orders were mailed twice: January 24, 2001, and Febn�ary 12 to Ale�ris Abreu and the occupant, both of 967 Edgerton. Mr. Abreu stated when he got the January notice, that is when he called his friend who ticketed the vehicle. Mr. Strathman asked if the police officer had ordered the vehicle towed, would the assessment go to the properry owner. Mr. Robinson responded it would be an administrative tow. The car is cited, towed, and the vehicle owner has to recover the vehicle. Steve Magner stated the property owner has to be present during an administrative tow to identify the vehicle. Mr. Robinson stated if he had said to the inspector that a police officer is working on this and it would be towed in a few days, there would not have been a problem. Gerry Strathman recommends deleting the assessment. 65 Winnipe¢ Avenue (JOlOSA) 65 Winni�ee Avenue (JOlOSV) Milt Randall, tenant, appeazed and stated the owner lives in Wisconsin and Mr. Randall feels he is responsible for what happens at the properry. There are two assessments here. One involves a vehicle that was towed and the other assessment is for a cleanup. (The cieanup was discussed first.) During the time of this assessment, said Mr. Randall, he was in the process of switching trash companies. For a month, he had to call his trash company because they were not picking it up. Then he got the assessment. He thought the company had finally taken the trash, but the Ciiy had 6 � �q'�o LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 page '7 instead. The assessment was sent to Wisconsin. By the time it got to Mr. Randall, he did not have time to do anything. (A videotape was shown.) Mr- Randall stated kids strip bikes and throw them in the rear of his house. The appliances came from lus house and were suppose to be picked up by the trash company. Gerry Strathman stated the owner was notified, the occupant received notice, and it was almost two weeks between the time notice was sent and the City did the cleanup. There was opportunity for someone to do the cleanup. Mr. Robinson stated orders went out on May 15, and a reinspection was done on May 23. The occupants supposedly called the inspector on May 23 to say he would take care of it by the weekend. The inspector went over there on May 30, the items were still there, so he issued the work order. (Now, the vehicles were discussed.) Gerry Strathman asked about the vehicles. Mr. Randall responded the inspector told him he had to move the cazs. He put one in the garage and the other right beside the garage on the slab. The inspector told him the plates were not current so he could not pazk it there. Mr. Randall put insurance on the car and current plates. Three days later, the caz was towed. The tabs were on the velucle when it was towed. He purchased the tabs the day after he received the notice. Mr. Strathinan stated orders were mailed on Januazy 18, the inspector went out an February 5, and again on February 21. Mr. Strathman asked did he have anything showing the vehicle had current piates. Mr. Randall responded he did not have anythiug with him. Mr. Strathman asked when the vehicle was towed. Mr. Robinson responded he was not sure when it was towed. JOl O5A - Mr. Strathman recommends approval of the assessment. 'The two appliances cleazly had been stored there. The owner had more than two weeks to get rid of them. J0105V - Mr. Strathman recoxnmends deleting the assessment ifthe owner can get him something showing the vehicle had legal tabs and legal plates when it was towed in February. If the owner cannot supply him with that, then the assessment stands. NOTE: Mr. Randall did bring in evidence that he purchased tabs on February 24, 2001. Upon checking with the Impound Lot, it was found that the vehicle arrived there on Mazch 3. Therefore, Gerry Strathman recommends deleting the assessment. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 605 Mag.nolia Avenue East (JOl O5A) 01—`t'�o Page 8 Mel Guyett, owner, appeazed and stated he purchased the properry recently. A fence was installed and bushes were removed. He was making azrangements to haul them away. He works about 12 hours a day and he could only do it on the weekend. He came home with a truck and a trailer to take it out of there. He has a friend who will sometimes do surprise things for him. Mr. Guyett thought this friend had done the work.. Mr. Strathman asked who was notified. Mr. Robinson responded Todd K. and Mary Kay Lewis were noiified at 605 Magnolia This was done on May 15, 2001, rechecked on May 12, and the work was done on May 29. Mr. Strathman asked when he became the owner. Mr. Guyett responded about July 7, 2001. Mr. Robinson responded the orders went out May 15. Gerry Strathman recommends approval of the assessment. When the owner purchased the property, he became responsible for the assessment. The seller is required to certify that there aze no pending assessments. If there are, the owner is suppose to take caze of them. The owner has the right to go to the previous owner because they aze responsible for it. Mr. Magner added that tifle insurance should cover things like this. Resolnrion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 84'7 Le�eington Parkwav South. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Mr. Magner showed photographs to Mr. Strathman.) John Kratz, owner, 1424 Edgcumbe Road, appeared and stated he just acquired this property on August 1. He would like to lay over this matter and wouid like to attach this property to another property adjacent to it. He would like to build a 12 unit townhouse. If that gets approved, this property will be torn down. The approval process is lengthy on this. He would like to do this in the fall. It is more likely to be six months. Given his plan to remove the building and given that the properry is a biight, Gerry Strathman asked, what is ihe problem with the property being removed now. Mr. Kratz responded his plan would be to rehabilitate the building if his plan is not approved. These matters can be highly chazged with neighborhood involvement. This property seems to be getting off to a friendlier start with the neighbors and he is more optimistic about the development. Steve Magner reported the properry has been vacant since Mazch l, 2000. Eight siunmary abatement notices have been issued to secure the house, cut tall grass, remove t.v. antenna, and remove hazardous mud and sand on sidewalk. On June 19, 2001, an inspecfion of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which consritute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. P,n order to abate a nuisance building was issued on July 11, 2001, with a compliance date of August 10. The vacant building fees aze paid. A code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a bond has not been posted. Estimated cost to repair is $80,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000. Mr. Magner would not haue a problem D�-qyo LEGISLAT'IVE HEARING MINLTfES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 9 with a short e}rtension, although siac months may not be feasible at this time unless a bond is posted. Mr. Strathman concurred saying that this nuisance building cannot stand indefinitely. Mr. Kratz stated he lives half a mile away. He has met all the neighbors. All the problems they had were with the previous owner. He has given them all his cazd, and they know who to call if there is a problem. He does not anticipate there will be more complaints. He does not want to knock it down so soon because his wsts go up so much. He would have to haul in fill to fill up the hole and there is too much fill on the side already that he has to haul out when the new building is built. Gerry Strathman laid over to the November 6, 2001, Legislative Hearing. In that time, the owner should be prepared to post a bond and rehabilitate the property or be prepazed to remove it. Summary Abatement Order Appeal for 1598 Hazel Street North. Walter Montpetit, owner, appeazed and stated tlus is regazding a wildlife gazden on lus property. It is 1,500 square feet. He has a 100 square foot patch sepazated. It is part of the landscaping scheme on his property. He received an order to cut it. It is in the backyazd. Gerry Strathman stated he has some remembrance about the City amending its notice to make provisions for native plantings. He asked would this qualify. Mr. Robinson responded he is not sure the norice stipulated what plantings could be in a native habitat. Sandy Pappas has been designated by an organization to determine what plants should be put in. Mr. Montpetit says that Harriet Island has azeas that look like the same type of scheme he is doing. Mr. Strathman asked is there someone on City staffthat can look at this properry. Mr. Robinson responded he has a name and phone number of the organization in charge of this issue. Just ta11 grass and weeds do not qualify. Gerry Strathman recommends laying over to the September 25, 2001, Legislative Hearings In the meantime, someone who lrnows about this issue can go to the property and make a deternunation. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1124 Conway Street. If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the property.) (Steve Magner submitted photographs.) Steve Magner reported this properiy has been vacant since February 2, 1998. The owner is deceased. Ten smnmary abatement notices have been issued for vacant building, cut tall grass, remove unlawfully pazked vehicle, remove rubbish, and secure structure. On July 20, 2001, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building o� -qqc LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLJTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 10 was issued on July 24, 2001, with a compliance date of August 8, 2001. A bond has not been posted. The cost to repair is $40,000 to $50,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000. The building was condemned by the Sewer Division. The properry has a septic tank, wluch collapsed. The property was cottdemned. When the owner purchased the property, he failed to check with the City. The City is not allowing any new sewer systems be installed. The owner would i�ave to connect to the ne�rt closest City sewer, which could cost up to $45,000. Before he died, he said he woutd let the properry go back to the mortgage company and he would not do the connecrion. He stayed at the properry as long as he could. Mr. Magner stated he and Mr. Robinson cut the owner more slack because he was in a ternunal condition. Gerry Strathman recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 245 Front Avenue. If the owner faiLs to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (I�io one appeazed to represent the property. Photographs were submitted.) Steve Magner reported this properiy has been vacant since July 13, 2000. Seven summary abatement notices have been issued for cut tall grass, secure structure, and remove rubbish. On June 26, 2001, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on July 11, 2001, with a compliance date of August 10. The vacant building fee are due. T�ation has placed an esrimated mazket value of $22,600 on the properiy; estimated cost to repair, $75,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000. As of September 4, 2001, a code compliance inspection has not been applied for, and a$2,000 bond has not been posted. Gerry Strathman recommends approval. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 62 Winifred Street West If the owner fails to comply, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the property.) Steve Magner this properiy has been vacant since July 30, 1990. There have been 20 summary abatement notices to remove refuse, cut tali grass, secure building, remove snow and ice, remove 16 vehicies/trailers, and allow occupancy of a registered vacant building. On December 22, 1999, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on January 4, 2000,with a compliance date of February 15, 2Q00. The vacant building fees are due. Real estate t�es are unpaid in the amount of $1,659.92. A bond was forfeited on June 13, 2001. The estimated cost to repair is $25,000. There was a previous resolution to repair or remove the property; the resolution was passed by the City Council. A new owner purchased the building the next day. The City Council amended the resolution to give the new owner 180 days. They failed to fuush the project. Mr. Magner has had little or no response from the owner, and he is disappointed the owner is not here today. O l-��o LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 4, 2001 Page 11 Gerry Strathman recommends approval. 291 Tonnine (JO105� Hazold Robinson recommended the assessment be deleted. Gerry Strathman recommends deleting the assessment. The meeting was adjoumed at 11:43 a.m. �