Loading...
02-25Council File # C�, � 0 Green Sheet # �O �d3 �.S Refened To Presented By RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 4'� Comsnittee: Date WFIEREAS, 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 two-story, wood frame duplex located on property hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property" and commonly known as ll48 Minnehaha Avenue East. This properly is legally described as follows, to wit: Lot 8, Block 2, A. Gotzian's Re-anangement of Sigel's Addition. 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 WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or before July 25, 2001, the following aze the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Nationscredit Financial Services Corp., d1b/a Equicredit, cfo CT Corporation System Inc., 405 2" Avenue South, Mpls., MN 55401, Loan # 8042050271; Nationscredit Financial Services Corp., dlb/a Equicredit, Riverview Office Tower, 8009 34�' Avenue South # 35Q, Bloomington, MN 55425, Loan # 8042050271; Henry & Mary Thomas, 19075 Edgewood Lane, Prior Lake, MN 55372; Novation Credit Union, f{kla Minne-Mine Credit Union, 1815 Suburban Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55119, Re: District Court Case # 62-C4-98-009282 & 62-C4-00- 005587; Wagers Business Systems, 1955 University Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55104, Re; District Court Case # 62-CX96012943; Cass County Abstract Co., 603 Minnesota Avenue West, Walker, MN 56484, Re: District Court Case # 62-C697001156; TCT Network, 1608 Como Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108 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 October 23, 2001; and WHEREAS, this order informed the then known interested or responsibie parties that the structure 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 shucture located on the Subject Property by November 22, 2001; and WFIEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolition; and WI3EREAS, this nuisance condirion has not been conected and Division of Code Enforcement requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings befare the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and 1 WHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with the 2 provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the public hearings; and o3-a 4 5 WF�REAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City 6 Council on Tuesday, December 18, 2001 to heaz testimony and evidence, and aftex receiving testimony and 7 evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible parties to 8 make the Subject Property safe and not deh to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and 9 remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all 10 applicable codes and ordinauces, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in 11 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolirion of the structure to be 12 completed within fi8een (15) days after the date of Yhe Council Hearing; and 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 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, January 2, 2002 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was considered by the Council; now therefore BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the above referenced public hearings, the Saint Paul City Councii hereby adopts the following Findings and Order concerning the Subject Property at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East: That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45. 2. Q 5. � � That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is estimated to exceed three thousand dollazs ($3,000.00). That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or Building code violations at the Subject Property. That an Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) was sent to the then known responsible parties to conect the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected. That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placard on the Subject 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 Irnown interested parties and owners are as previously stated in this resolution and that the notification requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled. ORDER The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order: 1. The above referenced interested ar responsible parties shall make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfate and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating tlus structure and conecting 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 alternative by demolishing and removing the struchue in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition and removal of the structure must be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing. o�-a�, 1 2. If the above corrective action is not completed within this pexiod of time the Citizen Service Office, 2 Division of Code Enforcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to 3 demolish and remove this shucture, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject 4 Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul I,egisiative Code. 6 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and zemoved by the City of Saint Paul, all personal 7 properiy or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed 8 from the properry by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If all personal property 9 is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shall remove and 10 dispose of such properry as provided by law. 11 12 4. It is further ordered, that a copy of this resolntion be mailed to the owners and interested part[es in accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Adopted by Council: Date �„ _ a, a.���,.,_ --�---�— Adoption Certified by Council Secretary � Approved by : Requested by Departnlent ofl By: by Mayor for Submission to Council Form Approved by City Attome� �a-a5 11l26i01 Wednesday, January 2, 2002 xu�aee wrs RqRYIc ORD92 TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES No � G�� j� « _._ T .-� � CRYAiiOpEY •' " — "— ❑ CRYCLiMI( ❑ sw�u�a�xxc¢sorc ❑ nwzw.� � wvoRtw��sasrcw� _!�� ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) City Council to pass this resolurion which will order the ownex(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is oxdered to remove the building. The subject property is located at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue �.�.� p�����.�� ��`'�'¢� PLANNING COMMISSION CIB COMMITfEE CML SERV{CE CAMMISS{ON Has this Pe�senffirtn everwiorked under a cwdiactfarthie tlepartment't YES NO Has this pe'sorJfifirm eve.vbeen a dly empbyee7 YES NO �ooes mis parson�irm o� a swn �a rw�manro�sessetl tiv am �+�r�r �wor�� YES NO . Is this P�rm a far8etetl ventlM .. YES NO This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chapter 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties known to the Enforcement Officer were given an order to repair or remove the building at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East by November 22, 2001, and have failed to comply with those orders. IFAPPROVED The City will eliminate a nuisance. � . �3�� J � 2�b� � '�"�'i"e"�i�'y wifC"s�en`� funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs wi11 be assessed to the properiy, collected as a special assessment against the properly taxes. '� remain unabated in the City. This buildmg(s) will continue to blight the community. OF iRANSACiION S � � COST/REVENUE BUDfiETED (CIRCIE ONE� � NO Nuisance Housing Abatement �mn _ 33261 (IXPWN) L o a-a �.� Date: December 18, 2001 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Room 330 City Hall 15 West Kellogg Boulevazd f�tII:Yq��►�/�T -�\�it►�e; Gerry Strathman Legis]ative Hearing Officer 1. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order for 407 Bay Street. (Laid over from 12-401) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends denying the appeal. 2. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2114 Mar�aret Street. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. 3. Resolurion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. rrn CITIZEN SERVICE OFFLCE Fred Owusu, Ciry Clerk CTTY OF SAINT PAUL Norm Coleman, M¢yor DIVIS[ON OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT Michaef R. Morehead, Program Nfanager o a-'� Nuis¢nce Building Code Enforcemen[ LS FY. ZCelloggBlvd. Rm I90 Tel: 651-266-8440 SaintPaul,MN55102__ _-- -- -- Fax:651-266-8�26 — e,- ;°..;,'^' (� � : l:..c . -.s. CJv1X�i i r....�J"� November 26, 2001 -�r F NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Citizen Service Office, VacanUNuisance Buildings Enfarcement 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: 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows: Legis3ative Hearing - Tuesday, December 18, 2001 City Council Hearing -`Vednesday, January 2, 2062 The owners and responsible parties of record are: Name and Last Known Address Nationscredit Financial Services Corp. d/b/a Equicredit c/o CT Corporation System Inc. 405 2° Avenue South Interest Fee Owner Mpls., MN 55401 Loan # 8042050271 Nationscredit Financial Services Corp. Fee Owner dfb/a Equicredit Riverview Office Tower 8009 34�' Avenue South # 350 Bloominb on, MN 55425 Loan � $042050271 Henry & Mary Thomas 19075 Edgewood Lane Prior Lake, MN 55372 Interested Parry/forclosed Mortgagors o �-' � 1148 Ivlinnehaha Avenue East November 26, 2001 Page 2 Name and Last Known Address Novation Credit Union f/k/a Minne-Mine Credit Union 1815 Suburban Avenue St. Paul, MN 55119 Re: District Gourt Case # 62-64-98-009282 Wagers Business Systems 1955 University Avenue _ St. Paul, NSN 55104 Re: District Court Case # 62-CX96012943 Cass CountyAbstract Co. 603 Minnesota Avenue West Walker, MN 56484 Re: District Court Case # 62-C697001156 TCT Nehvork 1608 Como Avenue St. Paul, PvIN 55108 The legal description `of this property is: Interest Interested Party/Possible Lienor Jud�nent Creditor 7ud�nent Creditor Jud�nent Creditor Lot 8, Block 2, A. Gotzian's Re-arrangement of SigePs Addition. Aivision of Code Enforcement has declazed tlus building(s) to constitute a"nuisance" as defined by Legislative Code, Chapter 45. Division of Code Enforcement has issued an order to the then known responsible parties to eliminate this nuisance condition by correcting the deficiencies or by razin� and removing this building(s). oa-as 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East November 26, 2001 Pa�e 3 Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains unabated, the community continues to suffez the blighting influence of this property. It is the recommendation of the Division of Code Enforcement that the City Council pass a resolurion 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, �teve �a�er Steve Magner � Vacant Buildings Supervisor Division of Code Enforcement Citizen Service Office SM:mI cc: Frank Berg, Building Inspection and Aesign Meghan Riley, City Attorneys Office Nancy Anderson, Assistant Seeretary to the Council Laurie Kaplan, PED-Housing Division ccnph oZ ZS NIINi7TES OF TI-� LEGISLATIVE HEARING Tuesday, December 18, 2001 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry Strathman, Legislative Hearing Officer The meeting was called to order at 10:02 a.m. STAFF PRESENT: Steve.Magner, Code Enforcement; Mike Morehead, Code Enforcement Appeal of Summary Abatement Order for 407 Bav Street. (Laid over from 12-4-01) Gerry Strathman stated a swvmary abatement order was issued to Terrence Tessmer on November 15, in which he was told to remove refuse on his property and all improperly stored materials. Mr. Tessmer filed an appeal to this order. Terrence Tessmer, ov�mer, appeared and stated he was asked politely by Mike Morehead to clean up the properry. Even though the conditions were not favorable, he got quite a bit of work done. Mr. Morehead was there this moming and said it looks a lot better. Mr. Tessmer told him that he did as much as he could to comply and would meet their expectations if he had the opportunity. Mr. Strathman asked how much longer it would take to bring the property into compliance. Mr. Tessmer responded he was hoping he could put if off until spring. He has been lucky with the weather and has spent hours outside days at a time. It has been a burden physically and financially because he is not able to do anything eise. He spent the majority of his time working on the yard. Mr. Strathman asked what js yet to be removed. Mr. Tessmer responded Mr. Morehead told him he cannot have any storage unit otiier than a gazage and sfied. He is self employed. His properry, yard, and vehicles aze part of his business, although it is a residential property. He has approximately 45% of lus properry closed off by a privacy fence, which is where he kept some of the items. Mr. Strathman asked what kind of items aze they. Mr. Tessmer responded merchandise he buys and sells. He thre�v a lot of it away that was worth money just to get to the point he is at right now. They want him to do it faster than what he finds feasible. Mr. Strathman stated they were out ihere undoubtedly because someone complained. Mr. Tessmer responded he is in a blue coliar neighborhood and has a lot of noisey neighbors. He does not know why lris stuff is bothering ius neighbors. He does not see how he is doing any harm to anyone. Mike Morehead asked how long he owned this house. Mr. Tessmer responded since 1983. Mr. Morehead reported there is an eartensive file on this property going back to the middle 1970's. A complaint was received from someone in the neighborhood who said that Code Enforcement had not been doing their job in resgect to this property. The azea inspector is somewhat intimidated by Mr. Tessmer, who is rather animated, but a nice man. The properry is being used as an outdoor storage area. It appeazs to be used goods. Mr. Morehead lmocked on the door, and Mr. Tessmer oZZ� MINUTES OF TF� LE(3ISLATIVE HEARING, December 18, 2001 Page 2 asked him to leave the properry; however, he did work with Mr. Morehead. They had a lengthy conversation. Mr. Mor.ehead took photographs, orders were issued on the property, and Mr. Tessmer appealed the orders. Mr. Morehead sta#ed he went to the property again this morning by appointment, met with Mr. Tessmer, and took three more photographs. The property is wned residential. Mr. Tessmer has no permits nor licenses to run a business at the property according to LIEP (License, Inspections, Environmental Protection). He has extensive outdoor storage and asked for an ea�tension to the spring to erect temporary storage to stack the items higher. Mr. Morehead's contention is that Mr. Tessmer cannot have any outdoor storage. He has made progress from several weeks ago: he has made room in the garage and restacked items along the fence. (Mr. Morehead showed Mr. Strathman photographs. They were shown to Mr. Tessmer also.) Mr. Tessmer asked aze they before and after photogaphs. Mr. Morehead responded yes. The house is in good condition. The cars aze legal. Mr. Morehead stated he asked Mr. Tessmer on several occasions to move his operations to another place. Mr. Tessmer responded he was never asked that; rather, he was asked did he have friends that could store some things. Mr. Strathman asked what is his recommendation. Mr. Morehead responded that Mr. Strathman concurs with Code EnforcemenYs request to summary abate the nuisance and deny the appeal. Mr. Strathman asked does Mr. Tessmer understand what is a summary abatement. Mr. Morehead responded he believes they have covered that. (Mr. Tessmer showed Mr. Strathman a"sales tax cazd.") Mr. Strathman asked did he have a license to conduct a used business from that location. Mr. Tessmer responded he did not know he needed one. Mr. Tessmer stated when the inspector Mr. Schilier started coming over, it was about one particulaz azea: tabs had to he put on one van, which Mr. Tessmer was in the process of getting off the property. Then, he was asked to clean an azea azound the trailer, wtrich Mr. Tessmer complied with. Mr. Schiller taped this on his door. (He showed Mr. Strathman several documents.) Mr. Schiller sent a document later about the van, which read to remove debris azound the reaz door of the house. It said nothing about the whole backyazd. Mr. Tessmer stated he complied with that. A week later, Mr. Morehead showed up. � Mr. Tessmer called Mr. Schiller and told him that he complied and not to bother him anymore. Mr. Tessmer figures he is being hazassed. Then, he gets a letter with a11 the items circied. Ae also got a letter from 7ohn Betz about some items. (Mr. Tessmer showed a letter and some paperwork to Mr. Strathman.) Mr. Tessmer stated Mr. Morehead is not being honest when he said there is a long history. Also, he did not ask Mr. Morehead to leave the property. He asked them to respect his right to private property, stated Mr. Tessmer. He would like to see the ordinance that gives them permission to - - - - oZ MINUT`ES OF TF� LEGISLATIVE HEARING, December 18, 2001 Page 3 come onto his property. Coming on lus properry is being disrespectful. In rehun, it wili make him more resentful. There aze plenty of businesses, including the Brewery, that have all kinds of stuff in the open, and Mr. Morehead said that does not matter because they can do it, stated Mr. Tessmer. The pitclvng mound on the playgrommd has a tazp with a dozen tires on it. Mr. Morehead told him that is okay, stated Mr. Tessmer. There is a double standard here. Mr. Strathman responded he has a right to look at the ordinance, but Code Enforcement has the authority to come onto his property. Mr. Morehead stated if Mr. Strathman rules thaY Code Enforcement can go forwazd, a police officer wili go to the properry, remove a section of the fence, and take the van with everything in it. It will be towed to the Impound Lot. If he does not claim it, there will be an assessment on it. With the police officer will come a City abatement crew. They will clean all the property down to the baze ground, and that will be a tax lien also. Mr. Morehead stated that Mr. Tessmer has made some effort and it is Code Enforcement policy to grant an extension because of his effort. If the appeal is denied, Mr. Morehead will not send anyone to the properiy until after the first of the yeaz. Mr. Tessmer stated Mr. Morehead came to the properiy this morning and he was nice. Now Mr. Tessmer is seeing the other side. Mr. Tessmer does not like to be intimidated and threatened, which is a natural response. He spent hours and days outside in adverse conditions in the last few weeks to compiy. Mr. Tessmer stated he told Mr. Morehead that he had not licensed the van because he used it for his business. He has another vehicle and he decided to use it as a metal shed. He told Mr. Morehead, if the van is a problem, he will license it. If the appeal is denied, he cannot comply with it. Mr. Strathman stated it is cleaz he has a lot of material improperly stored on the properiy. There is no doubt it has to be removed. This is a residential area. Mr. Tessmer asked do they work on the same side. Mr. Strathman responded they both work for the City, but Mr. Morehead works for the Administration and Mr. Strathman works for the City Council. Mr. Tessmer stated he does not know exactly what needs to be done. Mr. Morehead responded he will work with him. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal because he believe the City inspectors acted within the law and Mr. Tessmer needs to comply with tiris order. If he wants to pursue the appeal fiuther, he needs to give Mr. Strathman a letter by noon on Thursday. That letter can say whatever he wants it to say. The matter will go to the City Council on January 2. If the Cily Councii agrees with his decision, Code Enfarcement will take the action to abate the probiem as Mr. Morehead described it. If there is a way for Mr. Tessmer to take caze of getting rid of the mateziai, he should do it. Otherwise, the City will take everything including the van, and chazge him a high fee for removing it. The summary abatement may run into the thousands of dollazs. (Mr. Tessmer gave Mr. Strathman a letter disagreeing with the decision.) �ZZs MIAIIJTES OF Tf� LEGISLATIVE HEARING, December 18, 2001 Page 4 Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2114 Margaret 5treet If fhe owner fails to compIy with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the properly. Steve Magner submitted photographs.) Steve Magner reported ttris was condemned in September 2001, and it has been a vacant building since September 25, 2001. There have been two summary abatement notices issued to remove refuse and vehicles. On October 22, 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 October 24, 2001, with a compliance date of November 8, 2001. As of this date, this pmperry remains in a condition wluch comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The vacant building fees aze due. Reai estate ta7fes aze unpaid of $1,910. Taxation placed an estimated market value of $14,200 on the land and $22,100 on the building. As of December 18, 2001, a code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a $2,000 bond has not been posted. The estnnated cost to repair this properry is $25,200; the estimated demolish, $7,0(30 to $8,000. Mr. Magner stated this property owner has a long history of having gross unsanitary and extensive storage issues. The Ciiy cleaned out the property and the shed. Gerry Straffiman recommended approval. No one is here to represent the properly. � Resolution orderiag the owner to remove or repair the property at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the properry. Steve Magner submitted photographs.) Steve Magner reported this property was condemned December 2000 and has been vacant since January 8, 2001. The current owner is Nationscredit Financial Services Corporation. Nine sununary abatement notices have been issued to remove refuse, cut tall grass, secure building, remove snow and ice, remove vehicles. On October 3, 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 October 23, 2001, with a compliance date of I3ovember 22, 2001. As of this date, this property remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The vacant building fees aze due. Real estate taYes are unpaid of $3,260. Tasation has placed an esrimated mazket value of $12,000 on the land and $45,000 on the building. The estimated repairs aze $60,000 to $80,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $10,000. Gerry Strathman recommended approval. No one is here to represent the property. The meeting was adjourned at 10:43 a.m. Council File # C�, � 0 Green Sheet # �O �d3 �.S Refened To Presented By RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 4'� Comsnittee: Date WFIEREAS, 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 two-story, wood frame duplex located on property hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property" and commonly known as ll48 Minnehaha Avenue East. This properly is legally described as follows, to wit: Lot 8, Block 2, A. Gotzian's Re-anangement of Sigel's Addition. 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 WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or before July 25, 2001, the following aze the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Nationscredit Financial Services Corp., d1b/a Equicredit, cfo CT Corporation System Inc., 405 2" Avenue South, Mpls., MN 55401, Loan # 8042050271; Nationscredit Financial Services Corp., dlb/a Equicredit, Riverview Office Tower, 8009 34�' Avenue South # 35Q, Bloomington, MN 55425, Loan # 8042050271; Henry & Mary Thomas, 19075 Edgewood Lane, Prior Lake, MN 55372; Novation Credit Union, f{kla Minne-Mine Credit Union, 1815 Suburban Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55119, Re: District Court Case # 62-C4-98-009282 & 62-C4-00- 005587; Wagers Business Systems, 1955 University Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55104, Re; District Court Case # 62-CX96012943; Cass County Abstract Co., 603 Minnesota Avenue West, Walker, MN 56484, Re: District Court Case # 62-C697001156; TCT Network, 1608 Como Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108 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 October 23, 2001; and WHEREAS, this order informed the then known interested or responsibie parties that the structure 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 shucture located on the Subject Property by November 22, 2001; and WFIEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolition; and WI3EREAS, this nuisance condirion has not been conected and Division of Code Enforcement requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings befare the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and 1 WHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with the 2 provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the public hearings; and o3-a 4 5 WF�REAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City 6 Council on Tuesday, December 18, 2001 to heaz testimony and evidence, and aftex receiving testimony and 7 evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible parties to 8 make the Subject Property safe and not deh to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and 9 remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all 10 applicable codes and ordinauces, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in 11 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolirion of the structure to be 12 completed within fi8een (15) days after the date of Yhe Council Hearing; and 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 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, January 2, 2002 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was considered by the Council; now therefore BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the above referenced public hearings, the Saint Paul City Councii hereby adopts the following Findings and Order concerning the Subject Property at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East: That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45. 2. Q 5. � � That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is estimated to exceed three thousand dollazs ($3,000.00). That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or Building code violations at the Subject Property. That an Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) was sent to the then known responsible parties to conect the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected. That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placard on the Subject 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 Irnown interested parties and owners are as previously stated in this resolution and that the notification requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled. ORDER The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order: 1. The above referenced interested ar responsible parties shall make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfate and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating tlus structure and conecting 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 alternative by demolishing and removing the struchue in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition and removal of the structure must be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing. o�-a�, 1 2. If the above corrective action is not completed within this pexiod of time the Citizen Service Office, 2 Division of Code Enforcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to 3 demolish and remove this shucture, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject 4 Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul I,egisiative Code. 6 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and zemoved by the City of Saint Paul, all personal 7 properiy or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed 8 from the properry by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If all personal property 9 is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shall remove and 10 dispose of such properry as provided by law. 11 12 4. It is further ordered, that a copy of this resolntion be mailed to the owners and interested part[es in accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Adopted by Council: Date �„ _ a, a.���,.,_ --�---�— Adoption Certified by Council Secretary � Approved by : Requested by Departnlent ofl By: by Mayor for Submission to Council Form Approved by City Attome� �a-a5 11l26i01 Wednesday, January 2, 2002 xu�aee wrs RqRYIc ORD92 TOTAL � OF SIGNATURE PAGES No � G�� j� « _._ T .-� � CRYAiiOpEY •' " — "— ❑ CRYCLiMI( ❑ sw�u�a�xxc¢sorc ❑ nwzw.� � wvoRtw��sasrcw� _!�� ❑ (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE) City Council to pass this resolurion which will order the ownex(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is oxdered to remove the building. The subject property is located at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue �.�.� p�����.�� ��`'�'¢� PLANNING COMMISSION CIB COMMITfEE CML SERV{CE CAMMISS{ON Has this Pe�senffirtn everwiorked under a cwdiactfarthie tlepartment't YES NO Has this pe'sorJfifirm eve.vbeen a dly empbyee7 YES NO �ooes mis parson�irm o� a swn �a rw�manro�sessetl tiv am �+�r�r �wor�� YES NO . Is this P�rm a far8etetl ventlM .. YES NO This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chapter 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties known to the Enforcement Officer were given an order to repair or remove the building at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East by November 22, 2001, and have failed to comply with those orders. IFAPPROVED The City will eliminate a nuisance. � . �3�� J � 2�b� � '�"�'i"e"�i�'y wifC"s�en`� funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs wi11 be assessed to the properiy, collected as a special assessment against the properly taxes. '� remain unabated in the City. This buildmg(s) will continue to blight the community. OF iRANSACiION S � � COST/REVENUE BUDfiETED (CIRCIE ONE� � NO Nuisance Housing Abatement �mn _ 33261 (IXPWN) L o a-a �.� Date: December 18, 2001 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Room 330 City Hall 15 West Kellogg Boulevazd f�tII:Yq��►�/�T -�\�it►�e; Gerry Strathman Legis]ative Hearing Officer 1. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order for 407 Bay Street. (Laid over from 12-401) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends denying the appeal. 2. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2114 Mar�aret Street. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. 3. Resolurion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. rrn CITIZEN SERVICE OFFLCE Fred Owusu, Ciry Clerk CTTY OF SAINT PAUL Norm Coleman, M¢yor DIVIS[ON OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT Michaef R. Morehead, Program Nfanager o a-'� Nuis¢nce Building Code Enforcemen[ LS FY. ZCelloggBlvd. Rm I90 Tel: 651-266-8440 SaintPaul,MN55102__ _-- -- -- Fax:651-266-8�26 — e,- ;°..;,'^' (� � : l:..c . -.s. CJv1X�i i r....�J"� November 26, 2001 -�r F NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Citizen Service Office, VacanUNuisance Buildings Enfarcement 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: 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows: Legis3ative Hearing - Tuesday, December 18, 2001 City Council Hearing -`Vednesday, January 2, 2062 The owners and responsible parties of record are: Name and Last Known Address Nationscredit Financial Services Corp. d/b/a Equicredit c/o CT Corporation System Inc. 405 2° Avenue South Interest Fee Owner Mpls., MN 55401 Loan # 8042050271 Nationscredit Financial Services Corp. Fee Owner dfb/a Equicredit Riverview Office Tower 8009 34�' Avenue South # 350 Bloominb on, MN 55425 Loan � $042050271 Henry & Mary Thomas 19075 Edgewood Lane Prior Lake, MN 55372 Interested Parry/forclosed Mortgagors o �-' � 1148 Ivlinnehaha Avenue East November 26, 2001 Page 2 Name and Last Known Address Novation Credit Union f/k/a Minne-Mine Credit Union 1815 Suburban Avenue St. Paul, MN 55119 Re: District Gourt Case # 62-64-98-009282 Wagers Business Systems 1955 University Avenue _ St. Paul, NSN 55104 Re: District Court Case # 62-CX96012943 Cass CountyAbstract Co. 603 Minnesota Avenue West Walker, MN 56484 Re: District Court Case # 62-C697001156 TCT Nehvork 1608 Como Avenue St. Paul, PvIN 55108 The legal description `of this property is: Interest Interested Party/Possible Lienor Jud�nent Creditor 7ud�nent Creditor Jud�nent Creditor Lot 8, Block 2, A. Gotzian's Re-arrangement of SigePs Addition. Aivision of Code Enforcement has declazed tlus building(s) to constitute a"nuisance" as defined by Legislative Code, Chapter 45. Division of Code Enforcement has issued an order to the then known responsible parties to eliminate this nuisance condition by correcting the deficiencies or by razin� and removing this building(s). oa-as 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East November 26, 2001 Pa�e 3 Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains unabated, the community continues to suffez the blighting influence of this property. It is the recommendation of the Division of Code Enforcement that the City Council pass a resolurion 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, �teve �a�er Steve Magner � Vacant Buildings Supervisor Division of Code Enforcement Citizen Service Office SM:mI cc: Frank Berg, Building Inspection and Aesign Meghan Riley, City Attorneys Office Nancy Anderson, Assistant Seeretary to the Council Laurie Kaplan, PED-Housing Division ccnph oZ ZS NIINi7TES OF TI-� LEGISLATIVE HEARING Tuesday, December 18, 2001 Room 330 Courthouse Gerry Strathman, Legislative Hearing Officer The meeting was called to order at 10:02 a.m. STAFF PRESENT: Steve.Magner, Code Enforcement; Mike Morehead, Code Enforcement Appeal of Summary Abatement Order for 407 Bav Street. (Laid over from 12-4-01) Gerry Strathman stated a swvmary abatement order was issued to Terrence Tessmer on November 15, in which he was told to remove refuse on his property and all improperly stored materials. Mr. Tessmer filed an appeal to this order. Terrence Tessmer, ov�mer, appeared and stated he was asked politely by Mike Morehead to clean up the properry. Even though the conditions were not favorable, he got quite a bit of work done. Mr. Morehead was there this moming and said it looks a lot better. Mr. Tessmer told him that he did as much as he could to comply and would meet their expectations if he had the opportunity. Mr. Strathman asked how much longer it would take to bring the property into compliance. Mr. Tessmer responded he was hoping he could put if off until spring. He has been lucky with the weather and has spent hours outside days at a time. It has been a burden physically and financially because he is not able to do anything eise. He spent the majority of his time working on the yard. Mr. Strathman asked what js yet to be removed. Mr. Tessmer responded Mr. Morehead told him he cannot have any storage unit otiier than a gazage and sfied. He is self employed. His properry, yard, and vehicles aze part of his business, although it is a residential property. He has approximately 45% of lus properry closed off by a privacy fence, which is where he kept some of the items. Mr. Strathman asked what kind of items aze they. Mr. Tessmer responded merchandise he buys and sells. He thre�v a lot of it away that was worth money just to get to the point he is at right now. They want him to do it faster than what he finds feasible. Mr. Strathman stated they were out ihere undoubtedly because someone complained. Mr. Tessmer responded he is in a blue coliar neighborhood and has a lot of noisey neighbors. He does not know why lris stuff is bothering ius neighbors. He does not see how he is doing any harm to anyone. Mike Morehead asked how long he owned this house. Mr. Tessmer responded since 1983. Mr. Morehead reported there is an eartensive file on this property going back to the middle 1970's. A complaint was received from someone in the neighborhood who said that Code Enforcement had not been doing their job in resgect to this property. The azea inspector is somewhat intimidated by Mr. Tessmer, who is rather animated, but a nice man. The properry is being used as an outdoor storage area. It appeazs to be used goods. Mr. Morehead lmocked on the door, and Mr. Tessmer oZZ� MINUTES OF TF� LE(3ISLATIVE HEARING, December 18, 2001 Page 2 asked him to leave the properry; however, he did work with Mr. Morehead. They had a lengthy conversation. Mr. Mor.ehead took photographs, orders were issued on the property, and Mr. Tessmer appealed the orders. Mr. Morehead sta#ed he went to the property again this morning by appointment, met with Mr. Tessmer, and took three more photographs. The property is wned residential. Mr. Tessmer has no permits nor licenses to run a business at the property according to LIEP (License, Inspections, Environmental Protection). He has extensive outdoor storage and asked for an ea�tension to the spring to erect temporary storage to stack the items higher. Mr. Morehead's contention is that Mr. Tessmer cannot have any outdoor storage. He has made progress from several weeks ago: he has made room in the garage and restacked items along the fence. (Mr. Morehead showed Mr. Strathman photographs. They were shown to Mr. Tessmer also.) Mr. Tessmer asked aze they before and after photogaphs. Mr. Morehead responded yes. The house is in good condition. The cars aze legal. Mr. Morehead stated he asked Mr. Tessmer on several occasions to move his operations to another place. Mr. Tessmer responded he was never asked that; rather, he was asked did he have friends that could store some things. Mr. Strathman asked what is his recommendation. Mr. Morehead responded that Mr. Strathman concurs with Code EnforcemenYs request to summary abate the nuisance and deny the appeal. Mr. Strathman asked does Mr. Tessmer understand what is a summary abatement. Mr. Morehead responded he believes they have covered that. (Mr. Tessmer showed Mr. Strathman a"sales tax cazd.") Mr. Strathman asked did he have a license to conduct a used business from that location. Mr. Tessmer responded he did not know he needed one. Mr. Tessmer stated when the inspector Mr. Schilier started coming over, it was about one particulaz azea: tabs had to he put on one van, which Mr. Tessmer was in the process of getting off the property. Then, he was asked to clean an azea azound the trailer, wtrich Mr. Tessmer complied with. Mr. Schiller taped this on his door. (He showed Mr. Strathman several documents.) Mr. Schiller sent a document later about the van, which read to remove debris azound the reaz door of the house. It said nothing about the whole backyazd. Mr. Tessmer stated he complied with that. A week later, Mr. Morehead showed up. � Mr. Tessmer called Mr. Schiller and told him that he complied and not to bother him anymore. Mr. Tessmer figures he is being hazassed. Then, he gets a letter with a11 the items circied. Ae also got a letter from 7ohn Betz about some items. (Mr. Tessmer showed a letter and some paperwork to Mr. Strathman.) Mr. Tessmer stated Mr. Morehead is not being honest when he said there is a long history. Also, he did not ask Mr. Morehead to leave the property. He asked them to respect his right to private property, stated Mr. Tessmer. He would like to see the ordinance that gives them permission to - - - - oZ MINUT`ES OF TF� LEGISLATIVE HEARING, December 18, 2001 Page 3 come onto his property. Coming on lus properry is being disrespectful. In rehun, it wili make him more resentful. There aze plenty of businesses, including the Brewery, that have all kinds of stuff in the open, and Mr. Morehead said that does not matter because they can do it, stated Mr. Tessmer. The pitclvng mound on the playgrommd has a tazp with a dozen tires on it. Mr. Morehead told him that is okay, stated Mr. Tessmer. There is a double standard here. Mr. Strathman responded he has a right to look at the ordinance, but Code Enforcement has the authority to come onto his property. Mr. Morehead stated if Mr. Strathman rules thaY Code Enforcement can go forwazd, a police officer wili go to the properry, remove a section of the fence, and take the van with everything in it. It will be towed to the Impound Lot. If he does not claim it, there will be an assessment on it. With the police officer will come a City abatement crew. They will clean all the property down to the baze ground, and that will be a tax lien also. Mr. Morehead stated that Mr. Tessmer has made some effort and it is Code Enforcement policy to grant an extension because of his effort. If the appeal is denied, Mr. Morehead will not send anyone to the properiy until after the first of the yeaz. Mr. Tessmer stated Mr. Morehead came to the properiy this morning and he was nice. Now Mr. Tessmer is seeing the other side. Mr. Tessmer does not like to be intimidated and threatened, which is a natural response. He spent hours and days outside in adverse conditions in the last few weeks to compiy. Mr. Tessmer stated he told Mr. Morehead that he had not licensed the van because he used it for his business. He has another vehicle and he decided to use it as a metal shed. He told Mr. Morehead, if the van is a problem, he will license it. If the appeal is denied, he cannot comply with it. Mr. Strathman stated it is cleaz he has a lot of material improperly stored on the properiy. There is no doubt it has to be removed. This is a residential area. Mr. Tessmer asked do they work on the same side. Mr. Strathman responded they both work for the City, but Mr. Morehead works for the Administration and Mr. Strathman works for the City Council. Mr. Tessmer stated he does not know exactly what needs to be done. Mr. Morehead responded he will work with him. Gerry Strathman denied the appeal because he believe the City inspectors acted within the law and Mr. Tessmer needs to comply with tiris order. If he wants to pursue the appeal fiuther, he needs to give Mr. Strathman a letter by noon on Thursday. That letter can say whatever he wants it to say. The matter will go to the City Council on January 2. If the Cily Councii agrees with his decision, Code Enfarcement will take the action to abate the probiem as Mr. Morehead described it. If there is a way for Mr. Tessmer to take caze of getting rid of the mateziai, he should do it. Otherwise, the City will take everything including the van, and chazge him a high fee for removing it. The summary abatement may run into the thousands of dollazs. (Mr. Tessmer gave Mr. Strathman a letter disagreeing with the decision.) �ZZs MIAIIJTES OF Tf� LEGISLATIVE HEARING, December 18, 2001 Page 4 Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2114 Margaret 5treet If fhe owner fails to compIy with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the properly. Steve Magner submitted photographs.) Steve Magner reported ttris was condemned in September 2001, and it has been a vacant building since September 25, 2001. There have been two summary abatement notices issued to remove refuse and vehicles. On October 22, 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 October 24, 2001, with a compliance date of November 8, 2001. As of this date, this pmperry remains in a condition wluch comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The vacant building fees aze due. Reai estate ta7fes aze unpaid of $1,910. Taxation placed an estimated market value of $14,200 on the land and $22,100 on the building. As of December 18, 2001, a code compliance inspection has not been applied for and a $2,000 bond has not been posted. The estnnated cost to repair this properry is $25,200; the estimated demolish, $7,0(30 to $8,000. Mr. Magner stated this property owner has a long history of having gross unsanitary and extensive storage issues. The Ciiy cleaned out the property and the shed. Gerry Straffiman recommended approval. No one is here to represent the properly. � Resolution orderiag the owner to remove or repair the property at 1148 Minnehaha Avenue East. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (No one appeazed to represent the properry. Steve Magner submitted photographs.) Steve Magner reported this property was condemned December 2000 and has been vacant since January 8, 2001. The current owner is Nationscredit Financial Services Corporation. Nine sununary abatement notices have been issued to remove refuse, cut tall grass, secure building, remove snow and ice, remove vehicles. On October 3, 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 October 23, 2001, with a compliance date of I3ovember 22, 2001. As of this date, this property remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The vacant building fees aze due. Real estate taYes are unpaid of $3,260. Tasation has placed an esrimated mazket value of $12,000 on the land and $45,000 on the building. The estimated repairs aze $60,000 to $80,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $10,000. Gerry Strathman recommended approval. No one is here to represent the property. The meeting was adjourned at 10:43 a.m.