03-26_ �,, �
�'S i k >.. r i �i -
_ ,\z `-r; d �.. �
Council File # _9 '. _=_3.�p
Green Sheet # 113848 G
0 pt
RESOLUTION
OF
Presented by
Referred To
Committee Date:
1 WHEREAS, Cifizen Service Office, Division of Code Enfarcement, has requested the City
2 Council to hold public hearings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair
3 or wrecking and removal of a two-story, single family dwelling located on property hereinafter
4 refened to as the "Subject Property" and commonly known as ll 98 Sherburne Avenue. This
5 property is legally described as follows, to wit:
6
Lot 10, Block 7, Sanborn's Midway Addition.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information
obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on or before Apri124, 2002, the following are the
now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Daiuel J. Galarowicz, P.O.
Box 14123, St. Paul, MN 55114-0123; Daniel J. Galarowicz, 1198 Sherburne Avenue, St. Paul,
MN 55114; Conseco Finance Loan Corp., 14001 Grand Avenue, Burnsville, MN 55337; Claude
Worrell, 1035 Cedaz Lake Rd. S, Minneapolis, MN 55405; Claude A. Worrell, Reimbursable
Expenses, 2605 Campus Dr., Minneapolis, MN 55441; Lehman Capital, 200 Vessey Street, g"'
Floor, City of New York, NY 10285; Paul A. Weingarden and Olson, Uset & Weingarden
P.L.L.P., 4500 Park Glen Rd, Suite 310, Minneapolis, MN 55416; First State Mortgage Corp.,
1400 Corporate CenterCurve, Suite 110, Eagan, M1V 55121; Associates Home Equity Industrial
Loan Co. , 14001 Grand Avenue, Brunsville, MN 55337; Murnane, Conlin, White & Brandt, 444
Cedaz Street Suite 1800, St. Paul, MN 55101
WHEREAS, Division of Code Enfarcement 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 September 5, 2002; and
WHEREAS, this order informed the then known interested or responsible parties that the
structure located on the Subject Properiy 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 October 7, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placazd on the Subject Property declaring this
building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolition; and
PAUL, MINNESOTA
1.
o � -a�
Green Sheet 11384$, 1198 Sherbume Avenue
1 WfIEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Division of Code Enforcement
2 requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Legislative Hearing Officer of
3 the City Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and
4
5 WHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with
6 the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and
7 purpose of the public hearings; and
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City
Council on Tuesday, December 10, 2002, to heaz testimony and evidence, and after receiving
testunony and evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested
or responsible parties to make the Subject Properry safe and not detrimental to the public peace,
health, safety and welfare and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating
this structure in accardance with all applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by
demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances.
The rehabilitation or demolition of the shucture to be completed within fifteen (15) days after the
date of the Council Hearing; and
WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, December 18,
2002, and the testimony and evidence including the action talcen by the Legislative Hearing
Officer was considered by the Council; now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the above
referenced public hearings, the Saint Paul City Council hereby adopts the following Findings and
Order concerning the Subject Property at 1198 Sherburne Avenue:
That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paul
Legislative Code, Chapter 45.
2.
�
5.
:a
That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is estimated to exceed three
thousand dollars ($3,000.00).
That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or Building code violations at the
Subject Property.
That an Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) was sent to the then known responsible
parties to correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s).
That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected.
That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a piacard on the Subject Property which
declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition.
That this building has been routinely monitored by the Cifizen Service Offices, Division
of Code Enforcement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings.
2.
C'b - �(O
Green Sheet 113848, 1198 Sherburne Avenue
Ea
0
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
That the known interested parties and owners are as previously stated in this resolution
and that the notification requirements of Chapter 45 have been fulfilled.
• •7� '
The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following arder:
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 this structure and correcting all
deficiencies as prescribed in the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in
accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing
and removing the structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The
rehabilitation or demolition and removal of the structure must be completed wifliin 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 Enforcement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps
are necessary to demolish and remove this structure, fill the site and charge the costs
incurred against the Subject Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint
Paul Legislative Code.
3. Tn the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all
personal property or fixtt�res of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal
shall be removed from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this 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.
b'3 -�'So
Green Sheet 113848, 1198 Sherburne Avenue
by Departrnento£
Benanav
Bl akey
Sosh�om
Co le m an
Harris
✓
Approved by City Attomey
Lantry J
pproved by Mayor for Submission to Council
Reiter �
�I I � I a I i
Adopted by Council:
Date: � _� a( � � o�
Adoption Certified by Council
By: `i�� ._ �
Mayor: �
�
�
�.
. � OEPARTEGINT(OFFICElCOUNCII
City Council Offices
� COMACT PERSON 8 PFIONE
Marcia Moermond, 266-8560
, Ml1SiBEONCWNCILAGQiDABV(DATEI
, OATEIMiUTEO
January 2,
: •:'T'�ii!!^
TOTAL # OF SIGNATURE PAGES
GREEN SHEET
�
D3 -�
No � i ��4$
ertrwnoroEV � wrvcvnrt _
wwiuivaQxcvaow. ❑ Auxua�.mm�ccrn
w ���� ❑
(CLIP ALL LOCA770NS FOR SIGNATUR�
City Council to pass this resolution which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the
referenced building(s). If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Citizen
Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement, is ordered to remove the building. The
subject property is located at 1198 Sherburne Avenue.
PLANNING COMMISSION
CIB COMMITTEE
CIYIL SERV{CE COMMISSION
Flas fhie persoMrm eexr wnrketl under a conUact far Nis tlepartmeM7
YES NO
Has this pe�soNfirm ever been a pty emPbY�?
YES NO
Dces fhis prasaNfirm possess a sitill not normallypossessetl by any curterR city empbyee?
YES NO
Is thiB peisoNfirm a farpeted vendoR .
YES NO
This resolution replaces Council Fi1e �2-1188 and clarifies the Clty Council decision.
TnnnsncrwN
INFORMATON (IXPWN)
cosrmEVaue euooetEO �aac� oN�
AC7NITYNUMBER
����m
6'3 - �`
�.�.
Date: February I 1, 2003
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Place: Room 330 City Hall
15 West Kellogg Boulevazd
LEGISLATNE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAd2, CO�IDEMNATIONS,
AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Mazcia Mcermond
Legislative Hearing Officer
1
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1198 Sherburne
Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to
remove ihe huilding.
(Laid over from 12-10-02)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the resolution.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2285 Benson Avenue.
If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove
the building.
(Laid over from 1-28-03)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Heazing.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charles Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Laid over from 1-28-03)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the Mazch 11, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
4. Summary Abatements:
J02TRASH3Q Provide weekly garbage hauling service for the third quarter of 2002.
J0204C Demolitions of buildings from part of July 2002 to part of November
2002.
J0207A Property clean-up for part of July 2002 to part of December 2002.
J0207B Boazding-up of vacant buildings from August 2002 to November 2002.
J0203G Grass cutting for part of August 20�2 to October 2002.
774 Central Avenue West (J0207A) - .
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
a� -��
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 2
1000 Reanev Avenue (J0204C)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
567 Stryker Avenue (J0207B)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
172� Beech Street (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the April 8, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
(Note: At the meeting the Legislative Hearing Officer's recommendation was approval as
the owner did not appear; however, the owner called later and requested to be heard on
Apri18.)
1143 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
270 Charles Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
670 Charles Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
430 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
(Note: At the meeting, the Legislative Hearing Officer's recommendation was approval as
the owner did not appear; however, the owner called later and requested to be heard.)
603 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
837 Fourth Street East (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Heazing.
55 Front Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
76 Geranium Avenue West (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends reducing the assessment from-$306 to $186 plus
the $45 administrative fee for a total assessment of $231,
o� -��n
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 3
489 Haeue Avenue (J02TRASH3Q)
L,egislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1093 Hudson Road (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Offlcer recommends approval of the assessment.
714 IQlehart Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing O�cer recommends reducing the assessment from $195 to $100 plus
the $45 administrative fee for a total assessment of $145.
501 Kent S+aeet?`�1orth (J02TRASH3Q)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approvai of the assessment.
0 Liehtner Place. Vacant Lots (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
271 Maria Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over this matter to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
(Note: At the meeting, tne Legislative Heazing Officer's recommendation was approval as
the owner did not appear; however, the owner called later and requested to be heard.)
1459 Matilda Street (J03TRASH3Q)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1346 Minnehaha Avenue West (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
814 Sherburne Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1459 Sherburne Avenue (J02TRASH3Q)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
754 Sixth Street East (30207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
650 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1214 Minnehaha Avenue East (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. �
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
o z —�c�
LEGISLATIVE HEARIrTG REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 4
791 York Avenue (J0207B)
Legisla:ive Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
594 Lawson Avenue West (J0207B)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
2193 Bush Avenue (J0203G)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
42 Dale Street Street (J0207B)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1552 Sims Avenue (J0203G)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
S34 St. Peter Street (J0207B)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
550 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing.
(Note: the owmer did not appear; but calied later and requested to be heard on February
25.)
5. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 893 Desoto Street. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends that the following is done by noon of February
26, 2003: 1) Pay the vacant building fee, 2) Pay the real estate taxes, 3) Provide a work
plan indicating how all the items on the code compliance report will be completed and
inctude evidence of financial abitity to comptete them.
rrn
•�uueag
anr��Isi�aZ `£OOZ `T I��T0.a3 a� o� zano �uT,fei spuaunuooaz za�330 �uzreag ant�eist�aZ
•�utpjmq au� anouzaz o� paaapzo
si luauzanozduzI �.zadozd pue �utsnog poouzoqtj`dtaN `uor�niosaz atp q;rnn �ijduzoo o; sjte3 zaumo
a�31 •anuan� aumqzaqS 86i T l� �7zadosd au� zredaz zo anouzaz o� iaumo a[�1 �uuapzo uoi�niosag
.�aoS30 �ut.reaH ant��Is�aZ
puouuaoy� zio.rey�
p.renainog �BoIIa�I 1sa�Y1 S I
II�H �t?� 0££ �oo2I �a��Id
'�'� OO�OI :auzcy
ZOOZ `OI zaquzaoaQ :a�zQ
JNRIF�'�I �AI.L�'ISI�J�I
.L2IOd�2I
�j'e- LO
J� �
�Z.
MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING
ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR,
CONDEMNATIONS, AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS
Tuesday, February 11, 2003
Room 330 City HalllCourthouse
Mazcia Moermond, Legislative Heazing Officer
The meeting was called to order at 10:00 a.m.
STAFF PRESENT: John Betz, Code Enforcement Louise Langberg, Real Estate; Steve
Magner, Code Enforcement; Racquel Naylor, City Council Offices
�/ Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1198 Sherburne
�rC Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to
remove the building.
(Laid over from 12-10-02)
(No one appeared to represent the property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the resolution.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 2285 Benson Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Laid over from 1-28-03)
Ms. Moermond stated she understands there has been a code compliance inspection since the
previous Legislative Hearing.
Esther E. McGinnis, of Peterson, Fram & Bergman Professional Association, 50 Fifth Street
East, Suite 300, appeared and stated they have also posted the bond.
Ms. Moermond asked if have they begun the proceedings in District Court to seek a mortgage
foreciosure by judicial action. Ms. McGinnis responded they began by sending out the 30 days
notice. She was misinformed as to the steps for judicial fareclosure since she does not normaliy
do them. The first step is sending out the 30 days notice, but this is not going to impede anything
because they have taken possession of the proper[y. Under the mortgage, they do have the right
to make repairs. Also, they are in the process of soliciting bids to make the repairs pursuant to
the code compliance inspection. They are also soliciting bids to secure the properry.
Ms. Moermond asked what was indicated on the code compliance inspection. Mr. Magner
responded he was not present for the previous legislative hearing on this matter. Since that
hearing, a code compliance inspection has been completed. One issue was that the foundation
had a failure. The Office of LIEP (License, Inspection, Environmental Protection) is going to
require a structural engineer report on the foundation for its repair. The front exterior wall is
deteriorated to the point of collapse. They are requiring that pians be submitted for this. Other
G� ?�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 2
items have come up on the inspection, such as electrical and plumbing. It is sti11 his office's
recommendation that this property be demolished.
Ms. Moermond asked does he categorize this building as dangerous based on the code
compliance inspection. Mr. Magner responded it is possibly dangerous for anyone inside the
building. They would have to properly shore up the roof to make the repairs needed. They also
have to replace the roof covering, rafters, boazds, and vents to bring it into compliance.
Ms. Moermond stated this is a dire situation. Ms. McGinnis responded they have put out bids
and are serious about rehabilitating this property. Her question is what they need to do to prevent
this property from being demolished and to satisfy the City's safety concerns.
Ms. Moermond stated she is not confident that this building is safe to work on and worth trying
to rehabilitate based on the code compliance inspectaon with an unstable foundation and entire
front wall of the building. She will give Ms. McGinnis a chance to get the bids back and put
together a work program to inciude a work plan and a budget to indicate how the work plan
would be financed to complete the items on the code compliance inspection. If that meets with
the approval of staff and herself, Ms. McGinnis can go forward with rehabilitating the buildang.
They are on a quick time line. Ms. Moeimond is concemed about this structure continuing to
stand. If that work program does not meet staff concerns, then she will go ahead with the order
to remove or repair. She asked how long Code Enforcement needed to look at the work program.
Mr. Magner responded they can review it and meet with a LIEP inspector to review any issues of
safety in four business days.
Ms. Moermond stated by noon of Wednesday, February 19, Ms. McGinnis should send to Steve
Magner the following: 1) work program, 2) a financial report. On February 19, Ms. Moermond
will make a decision whether or not to move forward with the resolution to remove or repair.
This matter will be laid over to the February 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charles Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Laid over from 1-28-03)
The following appeared: Joseph H. Odens, owner; and Bob Volden, 1817 Van Buren Avenue,
friend.
(Mr. Odens gave Ms. Moermond paperwork. Mr. Magner looked at it also.)
Ms. Moermond stated the paperwork includes a list of all the items on the code compliance
inspection and where Mr. Odens is in terms of completing them. The next step is figuring out
what it costs to get this work done and then put together a work program to complete all of these
items. It is the City's law that he will need to post a$2,000 bond to work on this property, which
is a vacant building. Mr. Dawkins (Code Enforcement) is available to meet with him on this
o�=z.�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 3
matter and it will be laid over for four to six weeks fox him to think about his options. Ms.
Moermond would like a specific work program. There aze a lot of different ways to approach
this: he can undertake this work himself, he can go through a contractor, or go through a
nonprofit agency. There are also City loans that may be appropriate. He does not have to make a
decision today, but just heaz what Mr. Dawkins has to say. Also, Mr Odens should continue with
the list of things to do.
Mr. V olden stated there was a rundown of all the items. There is aiso a set of photographs of the
exterior. Many of the interior items have been done. There has been a great deal of progress.
They got a copy of the report regazding the abandonment. There is a great deal of toxic material
they take issue with. The important thing is that Mr. Odens gets back into the properiy. There
are a few items that exist in almost all older properties, such as toxic materials on basement
pipes. As he understands it, this property is put in a category of "new house code compliance."
Mr. Magner responded that is not the case. The code compliance inspection would be standard
for any property in that area based on those same requirements.
Mr. Moermond recommends laying over to the March 11, 2003, Legislative Hearing. At that
meeting, she would like to see a budget for completing the items on the list, some notion of how
it would be financed, and a notion of how the $2,000 bond will be financed. City staff are
confident that he is earnest and completed a fair bit already. The City is willing to give him more
time. The house is worth saving.
Summary Abatements:
J02TRASH3Q Provide weekly garbage hauling service for the third quarter of 2002.
J0204C Demolitions of buildings from part of July 2002 to part of November
2002.
J0207A Property clean-up for part of Ju{y 2002 to part of December 2002.
J0207B Boarding-up of vacant buildings from August 2002 to November 2002.
J0203G Grass cutting for part of August 2002 to October 2002.
774 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
(John Faulkner appeared. The green card was not returned; therefore, the records were not
available for this properry.)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003, Legisiative Hearing.
1000 Reanev Avenue (J0204C)
�Louie Vaillancourt, 1033 Selby Avenue, St. Paul Park, appeared. The green cazd was not
retumed; therefore, the records were not available for this property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
�� �
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 4
567 Stryker Avenue (J0207B)
(Tammi Lang, 485 Winona Avenue East, appeared. The green card was not retumed; therefore,
the records were not available for this properry.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
1125 Beech Street (J0207A)
(No one appeared to represent the property.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends laying over to the April 8, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
(At this hearing, Ms. Moermond's recommendation was approval as the owner did not appear;
however, the owner called later and requested to be heard on April 8.)
1143 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
(No one appeazed to represent the property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
270 Charles Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared to represent the property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
670 Charles Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeazed to represent the property.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
430 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared to represent the property.)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying to the February 25, 2003 Legislative Hearing.
603 Edmund Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared to represent the property.)
�� z�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY I 1, 2003 Page 5
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
(At this heazing, Ms. Moermond's recommendation was approval as the owner did not appear�,
however, the owner called later and requested to be heard.)
837 Fourth Street East (J0207A)
Racquel Naylor stated that the Dorothy Lyons cailed and would like this issue laid over to the
next hearing.
Mazcia Moermond recommends laying over to the February 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
55 Front Avenue (J0207A)
John Betz stated his department conducted a sweep in this area. On September 11, 2002, orders
were issued to the property owner about discarded vehicle parts, scrap lumber, and debris in yard
with a compliance date of September 15. The property was reinspected on September 16, and it
was still in violation. An order was sent to the Parks Department who cleaned the property on
September 18.
Paul Breckman, owner, appeared and stated he never received notice. He is 75 years old and has
been in and out of the hospital. They were doing some construction. There was a waterfall
garden in the back of that lot It was next door to the house he lived in for many years. They
were removing the rock garden and the contractor left some things.
Ms. Moermond requested to see the videotape.
(A videotape was shown.)
Mr. Breckman s#ated there were several tons of rock. The contractor piled the debris against the
garage. Mr. Breckman feels this is a financial burden on him.
Ms. Moermond asked what there is in terms of a notice. Mr. Betz responded he has a copy of the
notice sent to Mr. Breckman at 55 Front Avenue. It was mailed on September 11. There is
nothing in the file to indicate it was returned. A violation tag was also issued.
Ms. Moermond asked is this the address used by Ramsey County for tas purposes. Mr. Betz
responded yes.
Ms. Moermond asked is that the address where he receives his tax information. Mr. Breckman
responded yes. Also, he brought a letter from his doctor verifying he was ill at the time. Because
he was in and out of the hospital, he did not get a notice.
o� z�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 6
Ms. Moermond asked was he in the hospitai in September. Mr. Breckman responded yes, he was
back and forth. The items were piled against the garage. The gate was left open. It was not
visible from the sidewalk and the street.
Ms. Moermond asked was the disassembled waterfali on his property. Mr. Breckman responded
yes.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. The owner is responsible and the
notice was legally sent to his residence.
76 Geranium Avenue West (J0207A)
John Betz reported his office issued orders to the property owner on September 11, 2002, to
remove a pile of brush and branches in the yard area with a compliance date of September 15.
The recheck was on October 3 and it was not in compliance. The Pazk Department cleaned the
property on October 7.
Gail Kober stated she bought the house and double lot in the winter. There are about 15 trees on
the lot. The lot was very overgrown on the back fence and alley, and she is cleaning it up. When
she got the list, she called and spoke to Paula Seeley (Code Enforcement) on September 13 and
explained what she was doing. Ms. Kober started a small fire pit in the backyard because of the
volume of brush she was trying to get rid o£ She was trying to burn it bit by bit. Last summer it
was rainy and she couldn't burn it. The original pile was burned down. A friend came over with
a power saw to cut down a crab apple tree. She had a hand saw she was using also. Tl�at was the
new pile the City took away. Ms. Seeley said she tried to call her. She was using an old phone
number. Ms. Seeley told her to wait until she received her notice to do soinething abont this.
Ms. Kober stated it is going to take her some time to take care of all the brush It is a good sized
pile and she is working on it.
Mr. Betz stated this was conducted as part of a sweep. Ms. Seeley is not the area inspector but
issued the original notice. She indicates that she called the owner on September 16, and the
owner said she would burn it or bring it up north on September 16. This file went back to the
azea inspector who went to the property on October 3. He indicated he didn't think the situation
was going fast enough. He tried to call the owner to discuss this, but the phone number was
disconnected. Ms. Kober responded she is sure what they took was the second pile. The number
he called was her old number at 989 Armstrong. Her new number is listed.
Mr. Betz stated they try to make a courtesy call to discuss the situation.
Ms. Kober stated she would like to clear it out and make it a nice yard. She does not know how
to do it except littie by little. Tt is just she and her 15 yeaz old son.
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment by $75 from $306 to $186 plus the $45
administrative fee for a total assessment of $231. It appeazs Ms. Kober did contact the inspector
o� z�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 7
and try to make arrangements. Her official address listed with the County was notified that this
would be happening. (Louise Langberg explained to the owner the process for paying the
assessment.)
489 Hague Avenue (J02TRASH3Q)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1093 Hudson Road (J0207A)
John Betz reported the inspector was at the property on November 19, 2002, and the yard and
boulevard had an accumulation of refuse and debris. The owner was hand delivered an order to
remove it by the next day. It was not cleaned up. A work order was issued to the Parks
Department on November 20 and it was cleaned up that day.
Steve Magner suggested looking at the videotape in this case.
(A videotape was shown.)
Hosie L. Gant, owner, appeared and stated his mail goes to the post office. He can't have mail
delivered to his house. When he got there to load the truck, the City was picking it up already.
He was told to take up the matter with the City Council.
Ms. Moermond stated he was hand delivered a letter. Also, she noted that there have been
excessive violations over the past two years. Mr. Gant responded this is a condemned and
vacant building. He did put all that out there to move it. He had a friend help him because he
had two strokes, an operation, and a fractured collazbone. He is doing all he can. People dump
things in his driveway. There were two cazs back there, and he pushed them into the alley.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. He was hand delivered the notice to
clean it up within 24 hours.
714 I�lehart Avenue (J0207A)
Bob Regan, owner, appeared and stated he received an order indicating he had weeds to clean up.
He received one previousiy about the back fence. He and his wife thought they meant the weeds
along the property line. They aze in the process of landscaping the yard. He killed off the front
yazd. It is basically dirt and landscape borders there. They wer� going to finish it this yeaz. The
back fence is done. On the work order they thought the completion date was the 17"', but it was
actually the 14`". If they were given until the 17` it would have been done. There weren't that
many weeds in the front. A five man crew moved in. There were two pickup trucks, a dump
truck, and a flat bed with a fork lift. They showed the work order. He told them he thought it
c z�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 8
was the 17"'. He indicated that he did not want them to do anything on the property. He and wife
started to pull the weeds, and they had to cali in a police officer. He apologizes for that, but he
was perturbed. In 15 minutes, the City was done with the work. He got an assessment for $195.
He got a copy of the work report, which indicated one hour of work for $150. He did not have
any information on how they account for what they took and charged him. He had about 100
square yards of cutting.
John Betz reported that even if there were two people and a pickup truck, it would have been
$150. There is a minimum charge if they have to do the work. They have to get the equipment
there and to get it place to place. If the grass was cut when they arrived, there wouldn't have
been any charge. He can call the Parks Department to justify the hourly charge and a break down
of the charge.
Ms. Moermond asked for a copy of the abatement order.
(Ms. Moermond looked at the order.)
Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from $195 to $100 plus the $45
administrative fee for a total assessment of $145. From looking at the order, she would have read
it as a 14, but it is not as clear as it could be. However, she is dismayed that the situation rose to
the level which required a police officer to come out. It costs the City $150 to send out a squad
car. Mr. Regan responded he understands.
501 Kent Street North (J02TRASH3Q)
John Betz reported there was a complaint issued about trash in the yard. On August 22, 2002, an
inspector notified the property owner to remove trash and provide trash service by August 28.
On September 17, there was still no proof that there was trash service. An order was issued to
the Parks Department to provide a container and weekly trash service. This charge is for $50 to
deliver the container and $50 a week to empty the container until the owner provides proof that
he hired a licensed refuse hauler. That has happened. The City's service discontinued on
October 2.
Josh Trent, owner, appeared and stated this is his grandmother's place that he bought to keep her
in her house. His aunt takes care of her. He told them it was their responsibility to get a garbage
hauler. They said they would and they never did. They had three garbage bags tied in a knot.
When they have four bags, they haul them away to the City dump. He never received a notice
that he had to get a garbage hauler. He was told by Paula Seeley (Code Enforcement) that he had
to have the yard clean. He cleaned the yard. Ail of a sudden, a garbage truck dropped the
dumpster off. He had no prewarning of that. The gazbage crew wanted $50 per week. Waste
Management gave him two 60 gallon barrels picked up 4 times a month for $25 a month. No
garbage was ever put in the City's dumpster. As far as this issue goes, he is being charged $50
for garbage hauling, $20 for recheck commercial service, and $20 for a service chazge. No
v� Z�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 9
garbage was hauled out of his yard. Mr. Betz responded that the $50 was actually for dropping
off the container.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. It is expensive for the City to provide
gazbage service for a house here and there.
0 Li�htner Place. Vacant Lots
(No one appeazed.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
271 Maria Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over this matter to the February 25, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
(Note: At the meeting, Ms. Moermond's recommendation was to approve the assessment;
however, the owner called later to request that it be heard on February 25 as he wili be out of
town for a while.)
1459 Matilda Street (J03TRASH3Q)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1346 Minnehaha Avenue West (J0207A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
814 Sherburne Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeazed.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1459 Sherburne Avenue (J02TRASH3Q)
(No one appeazed.)
v� �
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 10
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
754 Sixth Street East (J0207A)
John Betz reported this is actually two separate charges. On the first, orders were issued on
September 18, 2002, to clean up refuse, tall grass, debris, garbage in the yard with a compliance
date of September 26. The work was not done by the owner, and the Parks Department cleaned it
October 1.
The second set of abatement orders was issued on October 2, 2002, to clean the yard, and cut
grass by October 14. A reinspection was done on October 15. A work order was issued to the
Parks Department, who cleaned it on November 12.
Lucille Widing, 1349 Winchell Street, owner, appeared and stated she rented the property. The
new owner informed her that a renter said the City cut the grass. Ms. Widing moved, and her
change of address should have followed her. She has always coinplied with the City's notice.
The City is not hard to deal with. If she needs more time, they give it to her.
Ms. Moermond asked when she sold the property. Ms. Widing responded Aprii or May 2002.
Ms. Moermond asked was her name still the owner of record with Ramsey County. Mr. Betz
responded the orders were issued to Lucille Widing at 1362 Birmingham Street. Ms. Widing
responded she does not live there anymore.
Mr. Betz stated the orders were also sent to the occupant at 754 Sixth. The ones sent to Widing
were sent back to Code Enforcement undeliverable because the forwazding had expired.
Ms. Moermond asked is the new owner an occupant. Ms. Widing responded she is not sure.
Mr. Betz asked when the sale occurred. Ms. Widing responded it was empty on February 1. She
evicted the renters and she put it up for sale. It was empty for a few months. She is not sure
when she closed on the property.
Mr. Betz asked did she own the property when the City cleaned it. Ms. Widing responded she
thinks she did.
Mr. Betz stated if she did own it, she should have maintained it. The grass was not being cut, the
yard was full of trash. Ms. Widing responded she did clean the yard. There were two dumpsters
there.
Ms. Moermond stated if Ms. Widing can bring to her evidence that she sold the property prior to
the abatement orders being issued, then she will recommend removing the assessment. If she
cannot, the assessment will stick.
�� - �-- Y�
LEGISLATIVE HEAKING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 11
(Ms. Widing faxed her purchase agreement to Ms. Moermond. It appears she owned the property
when both notices were sent; therefore, Ms. Moermond's recommendation is for approval of the
assessment.)
650 Central Avenue West (J0207A)
Steve Magner reported this is a properry cleanup for scrap wood, metal, plastics, junk, and tall
grass in the boulevard and alley. A summary abatement order was mailed on June 31, 2002, with
a compliance date of July 30. It was rechecked on August 13 and the Parks Department was sent
a work order on that date.
Lori Athias, 4520 Orchard Avenue, Robbinsdale, appeared and stated they purchased the
property on August 26 as a rehab property. There was no notice and they cleaned up everything.
The title company checked the properiy and there was nothing there.
Marcia Moermond stated this is one of those unfortunate situations in that flie title company
would have discovered it, but the timing is close. This is not a problem between the new owners
and the City, but between the new owners and the previous owner. Mr. Magner responded Code
Enforcement took a summary abatement action prior to the closing. They notified the owners of
record at the time, which are the taxpayers at the address provided to them. Ms. Athias
responded the sellers are deceased. Mr. Magner responded Willie Traxler was the fee owner, but
Phyllis TraYler, one of the siblings, was one of the parties in chazge of the property at the time.
This issue revolves azound them contacting the title company to cover this which should have
picked up at the time of closing.
Ms. Moermond asked is there any information to provide to them. When she hears appeals, it is
about whether the work occurred, whether it should have occurred. She is just hearing that this
information was not disclosed to the new owners. When they buy it, they assume these
assessments.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. (Mr. Magner gave them information
on this assessment.)
1214 Minnehaha Avenue East (J0207A)
(No one appeared.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East (J0207A)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
c��=z�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 12
791 York Avenue (J0207B)
Steve Magner reported this was a boarding up of an unsecure building due to a fire. This was
ordered by the fire department. As standard procedure, when the fire department is at the scene
and no one is able to take immediate action to secure the properiy, they will contact the boarding
contractar to secure the location so there is no vandalism or damage to the structure. It
immediately becomes a nuisance as defined by the administrative code.
Bill Cunnien, owner, 2529 Cottage Grove Drive, Woodbury, appeared and stated he arrived
home that afternoon, and there was a message from the Fire Department that the house had
bumed. When he got there at 5:00, the Fire Department was still there, and they were boarding
up the property.
Marcia Moermond stated the Fire Department is completely right to take care of the situation for
safety issues. Steve Magner responded that they usually recommend that these costs are turned
over to the insurance company as it is generally covered as part of the loss. Mr. Cmuiien
responded they will not cover it.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment, but she suggested that the owner write
the Councilmember and explain this. The Councilmember for this area is Council President
Bostrom.
594 Lawson Avenue West (J0207B)
Steve Magner reported he received a call from the board up contractor. The police department
requested this property be boarded up due to an ongoing investigation of the scene. There had
been a homicide at this unit, and the detectives did not want anyone to enter this property, even
though they had put on their standard lock. Because there was some notoriety to the case, they
wexe concemed that there was a possibility of unlawful entry. Mr. Magner went to the scene
with the Police Department and the boarding contractor. He notified the on-site caretaker who
was an offspring of the owner. He made a phone call to the owner to indicate the action he was
taking. Mr. Magner also indicated to the owner that he may want to appear at this forum.
Marcia Moermond asked did the owner had an opportunity to take caze of this. Mr. Magner
responded he had no chance to board this because the Police Department was trying to stop any
entry into this unit. They were barring the owner from entry.
The following appeazed; Kendall Crosby, 259 11"' Avenue North, South Saint Paul, owner; and
Joe Keller, caretaker. Mr. Crosby's son was living at the property. They own a hardware store a
half a biock away. This was the second floor. They have not had any problems at this property.
It is a secure building and has a front door secure lock. They lost six months of rent on this
because they were locked out of their building. The police were funny on this. They boarded it
up without letting him know. The notice was never sent to him. It was sent to the prior owner.
�� ��
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY I 1, 2003 Page 13
They have owned it for aimost two years. They lost $3,600 of rent. They aze today just starting
to remodel this apartment from the police moving everything out, even the carpeting.
Ms. Moermond asked how long it had been since the unit was remodeled. Mr. Crosby responded
it had not been remodeled for eight years. They are in the hardware business, and they have all
the boarding materials. Their insurance company will not cover it. They might drop them
because rentai insurance is hard to come by, so he does not want to claim it on the insurance.
There was never any problems at this property. There was almost four weeks after the police
were done. They released the apartment four weeks prior, and never notified him. He had to
remove the boards himself.
Ms. Moermond recommends deleting the assessment. The unit was boarded because it was a
crime scene and the police thought that needed to happen. Also, she wonders about victim
protection programs, although she does not know if it applies to an owner of a building.
2193 Bush Avenue (J0203G)
(No one appeazed.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
42 Dale Street North (J0207B)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1552 Sims Avenue (J0203G)
Steve Magner reported this is about tall grass and weeds on the boulevard and yard. On August
2, 2002, an order was issued to the owner on record, Guaranty Residential Lending, Austin
Texas, and Shoua Lor and Daosavanh Mua, 3273 Cottage Grove Drive, Woodbury. The
compliance date was August 8. The work was done by a contractor on August 16. There have
been four previous suminary abatement orders.
Daosavanh Mua, owner, appeared and stated her house caught on fire on September 2001. They
never received notice to mow the lawn. They did receive a letter to pick up the trash and remove
the caz. They were no longer at 3273 Cottage Grove Drive in August 2002. They were at 726
Desoto. Mr. Magner responded his office would be unawaze of that unless the property records
are changed or his office is notified.
Marcia Moermond recommends denying the appeal. Previous orders have been issued in the
past. The owner has a history and should know what it takes to maintain the property. She
should have been checking the properry and notifying the County about her change in address.
���-b
LEGISLATIVB HEARING MiNUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 14
(Ms. Mua gave her new address to Mr. Magner.)
534 St. Peter Street (J0207B)
(No one appeared.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
Resolution ordering the ofvner to remove or repair the property at 893 Desoto Street. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Steve Magner submitted photographs.)
Steve Magner reported this is a two story wood frame duplex. The building has been vacant
since February 26, 2002. The current owner is Daniel De La Cruz. Seven summary abatement
notices have been issued to remove refuse, cut grass, remove staircase, secure south entry door
and gazage wall. On December 18, 2002, 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 December 23, 2002, with a compliance date
of January 22. 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 and owing. Reai estate taYes
aze unpaid of $1,970.24. Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $69,000 on the
building and $9,900 on the land. On July 22, 2002, a code compliance inspection was obtained.
On January 21, 2003, the $2,000 bond was posted. Code Enforcement estimates the cost to
repair is $60,000 to $70,000; estimated cost to demolish, $8,000 to $9,000.
The following appeared: Ricazdo Solomon, previous owner, 5228 Brookdale Court, Brooklyn
Park; Yolanda Medeliin, 1523 Magnolia Avenue East #2; Don Speese, loan officer, 9201 41
Avenue North, New Hope.
Marcia Moermond asked what category this is. Mr. Magner responded it is a Category 2, which
is ciassified as a nuisance by the legislative code and would require a bond.
Mr. Solomon stated he bought the bu3lding in 1994 and started to rent it. He sold it to Daniel De
La Cruz, son-in-law of Ms. Madellin. Mr. Solomon stili has a second mortgage on the place. He
found out in June about the fire in February 2002 and it has been vacant since this. He didn't
know anything about the other conditions listed. The fire seems to be a lot more than that. It has
not been occupied.
Ms. Moermond asked if he purchased it from him. Mr. Solomon responded Daniel De La Cruz
has a mortgage. He put $10,000 and Mr. Solomon had to carcy about $18,QQ0. Other than that,
Jaan came to him and said he needed him to help. They were put out of the place based on the
fire. He started to contact his insurance company so he could get some help. They said they
c��Z�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 15
wouid not cover it and they did not have insurance. When he sold the place in 2001, he had a
yeaz's worth of insurance that didn't expire until Apri12002. He was not aware of the other
conditions.
Ms. Medeliin stated she was sent a notice that she had to talk to the inspectors. They told her to
pay the bond. ThaYs what she did. She thinks the inspector saw the mattresses and told her she
could not go back into the buildings. They first told her she could go back in within three days.
Then they put up a paper saying she could not go in. She does know what happened then. They
told her now to pay the $2,000 fine so she can start working on the house.
Mr. Magner stated the City does not have a defined person who has physical control of the
property. The inspectors have had conversation with Juan (Ms. Medellin's husband) and Mr.
Magner has had conversations with some contractors. Daniel De La Cruz purchased the property
from Mr. Solomon and the property was sold in two fashions. Mr. De La Cruz pulled a mortgage
and he has a recorded contract for the rest of the monies with Mr. Solomon. He asked where Mr.
De La Cruz is. Ms. Medellin responded he is her son-in-law and he is letting Ms. Medellin
occupy the building. He just started working.
Mr. Magner went on to say that Mr. De La Cruz is the one that technically has the ownership of
the property. If he was to register the building with Code Enforcement, pay the vacant building
fees, and hire a licensed contractors, they could commence action and complete this project if
Ms. Moermond and the Council are willing to let them do that. If Mr. De La Cruz does not come
forward, Mr. Solomon's course of action as an interested party is to file with Ramsey County
action to cancel the contract to take over possession to control the asset. He can come to Code
Enforcement to register the vacant building, and then request Mr. Moermond give them 180 days
to complete the repairs. If they do not complete the project, the City can step in and remove the
structure.
Mr. Solomon stated when he first found out about the fire, he paid a fee, which he thought was
the vacant building fee. It was approximately $125. Mr. Magner responded that would have
covered the code compliance inspection report.
Mr. Solomon stated the bottom line is Daniel De La Cruz has to come down, register the
building, and then get the contractors working on it. Mr. Magner responded yes and he has to
ask the Ms. Moermond to give him 180 days to fix up 50% of the items on the code compliance
inspection report.
Mr. Speese stated he did not know all this has to be done.
Mr. Solomon stated it was unpaid taxes, but he thought it was escrowed. Mr. Magner responded
this is information his office received from Ramsey County. Without having Mr. De La Cruz
here, it is hazd to discuss this matter. Mr. Magner's recommendation is that someone stop in the
office at 1600 White Bear to register the building and pay the fee.
���
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 11, 2003 Page 16
Mr. Solomon stated the building is structurally sound.
Ms. Moermond stated by noon of February 26, the vacant building fee should be posted. She
would also like to see those real estate tases paid. That should be taken care of by noon of the
26` as well as a sign of their seriousness to undertake and compleYe this rehabilitation. Also, a
plan to accomplish all the things on the code compliance inspection, who wili do what, how
much it will cost, and how to accomplish this financially.
Mr. Solomon asked for a copy of the code compliance inspection Mr. Magner responded by
recommending they go to LIEP.
Mr. Speese asked does Daniel have to be present. Mr. Magner responded not as long as he
follows all the criteria: registered the building, paying the vacant building fee, and paying the
taxes by noon of February 26.
Ms. Moermond recommends granting the owner 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the
property on condition that the following is done by noon of February 26, 2003:
1) Pay the vacant building fee;
2) Real estate tases paid; and
3) A work program indicating how all the items on the code compliance report will be
completed and include evidence of financial ability to complete them.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:01 p.m.
rrn
z.,
.�u ', — A�,
�'
. �'��
Y � h `�
� }
� �.�
s �� .
� �, �- ��
� a'
� ��,
� ��� ',
�J�
I)��v'
�1 .
�'.
\,'' ♦`
( �
� �i
.' il
e
r
/
/
� i
i ��� .� 4 4� �I
.
�
,
' � , � .I '
�� �
i
,�.
_ �. �
I , ; ��
� �