03-301�me��
R�r.` � � �-
RESOLUTION
OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
Presented By
Referred To
�9
Committee: Date
1 WHEREAS, Citizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement has requested the City Council
2 to hold public hearings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or wrecking and
3 removal of a two-story, wood frame, single family dwelling located on property hereinafter referred to as
4 the "Subject Property" and conunonly lrnown as 20 Sycamore Street East. This property is legally
5 described as follows, to wit:
6
7
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
Lot 11, Block 3, Drake's 2° Addition to the City of St. Paul.
WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information
obtained by Division of Code Enforcement on ar before October 1, 2002, the following are the now known
interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Dorothy M. Doolittle, 20 Sycamore Street East,
St. Paul, MN 55 1 1 7-5 559; Dorothy M. Doolittle, C/O Marie Roozen, 595 Hawthorne Avenue East, St.
Paul, MN 55101; City of Saint Paul, C/O City Clerk, City Hall Room 170, 15 West Kellogg Boulevard,
Saint Paul, MN 55102; HRA Project Services, 25 4�' Street W. 12`� Floor, St. Paul, MN 55102; Bee Vue
1292 Donegal Drive, Woodbury, MN 55125
WHEREAS, Division of Code Enforcement has served in accordance with the provisions of
Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code an arder identified as an"Order to Abate Nuisance
Building(s)" dated January 13, 2003; and
WHEREAS, this order informed the then lrnown interested or responsible parties that the structure
located on the Subject Property is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and
WHEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or
demolish the sriucture located on the Subj ect Property by January 29, 2003; and
WIIEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this
building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subj ect to demolition; and
WHEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Division of Code Enforcement
requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City
Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and
WHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the
public hearings; and
council File # �3-.��i
Green Sheet # ��.1�1�.
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City b3-30\
Council on Tuesday, Mazch 11, 2003 to hear testunony and evidence, and after receiving testimony and
evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested ar responsible parties to
make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and
remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all
applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the shucture in
accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitarion or demolition of the structure to be
completed withi��eex{-�3}days after the date of the Council Hearing; and
at1a.1 e:gh� \8'O>
WHEREAS, a hearing was eld efore the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, Mazch 26, 2003
and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was
considered by the Council; now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the above referenced
public hearings, the Saint Paul City Council hereby adopts the following Findings and Order concerning the
Subject Property at 20 Sycamore Street East:
That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defned in Saint Paul
Legislarive Code, Chapter 45.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
�
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 Properiy.
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 haue not been corrected.
That Division of Code Enforcement has posted a placard on the Subj ect Property which
declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition.
That this building has been routinely monitored by the Citizen Service Offices, Division of
Code Enforcement, Vacant/Nuisance Buildings.
That the known interested parties and owners aze as 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:
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 shucture
50 must be completed within-€r�eea-(�S} days after the date of the Council Hearing.
Orz�¢� C��+.v�a.r�d G �c� ~ � 1..���
AA-ADA-E mp oy
O� -10�
1 2. If the above correcrive action is not completed within this period 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 Subj ect
4 Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.
6 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal
7 property or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed
8 from the properly 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 properiy as provided by law.
11
12 4. It is further ardered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to the owners and interested parties in
accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.
Yeas Navs Absent
BENANAV �/
BLAKEY ,�
BOSTROM ,�
�OLEMAN ✓
HARR/S ,�
LANTRY ,
RE/TER ✓
n o
Adopted by Council: Date � do
Requested by Department of:
Citizen Se ice Office• Code Enforcement
By: �� ` W
Form Approved by City Attorney
By: �/,��
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
By
Appr
By:
By:
Mayor for Submission
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
�
Division of Code Enforcement � 02/21/03
�aarncra�r�a�or� ,
Andy Dawldns 266-8427 �
AUST 9E ON COUNCILNGH�IDiN BY (OATq
AldlGil
o e
INI�PoR
RWTWf
�
TOTAL S OF SIGNATURE PAGES
City Council to pass this resolurion which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If
the owner fails to comply with the resolurion, the Cirizen Service Office, Division of Code Enforcement is ordered
to remove the building. The subject property is located at 20 Sycamore Street East.
,.i ,
PLANNING COMMISSION
CIB COMMITTEE
CML SERVICE CAMMISSION
GREEN SHEET
O� -�e\
No 102�?27
��.c..
nIMIfJ11tgAY1CFSit ❑ HINICULafil1I11CCfC
YYpI(CRAtYRAM1� ❑
(CLJP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
rmsmispe�aJfxm e✓erv.oncea unauacaA�ac[brmisaepaNnenrt
V6 NO
ties tlim P�sarufim ever heen a aty anpbyeeT
YES NO
Oces Mis persoNfirm P� a s1aYl not nomWff'P���1 by anY wrre�R cilY �npbyee7
YES NO
IstluspdsorJfwmaterge[edveMM ,
YES WO
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 Panl Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties lrnown to the Enforcement
Officer were given an order to repair ar remove the building at 20 Sycamore Street East by January 29; 2003, and
,� ,
'�,`'
The City will eliminate a nuisance.
,y_�m�:.��,�.:
�dAR U 3 2003
The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to the property,
A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will continue to blight the community.
oFrRawsncnoHt $7,000-$8.000
`� .11 " �� I • ' �. - 11 -
COST/REVQlUE BUOGETm �CIRCLE ONq ( YE3 J NO
ACTNRV NtBABER
, AA-AllA-EEO Employer
d � —30�
T2EPORT
Date: March 11, 2003
Time: 10:00 a.m.
130 p.m. (2168 Minnehaha only)
Place: Room 330 City Hali
15 West Kellogg Boulevard
LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAII2,
CONDEMNATIONS, SiJMMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, AND ABATEMENT
ASSESSMENTS
Marcia Moermond
Legislative Hearing Officer
1. 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 overfrom 2-11-03)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying this over to the March 25, 2003,
Legislative Hearing per a request from staff.
2. J0207A1A Laid over summary abatements from February 25, 2003, for property
cleanup at 712 Hawthorne Avenue and 627 Palace Avenue.
627 Palace Avenue
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
712 Hawthorne Avenue East
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the May 13, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
3. Laid over summary abatements from February 25, 2003:
J0207A1AA 2021 California Avenue East
J0205VVV Towing of abandoned vehicles from private properties at 115
Sycamore Street East and 123 Geranium Avenue East.
J0205VVVV Towing of abandoned vehicles at 2168 Minnehaha Avenue East.
2021 California Avenue East
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East
(Also see Item 4.)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
123 Geranium Avenue East
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
O�-�o� .
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF MARCH i l, 2003
115 Svcamore Street East
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
Page 2
4. J0207AAAAA Property Cleanup from February 25, 2003 at 2168 Minnehaha
Avenue East
(Laid over from 2-25-03)
(Also see Item 3.)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
5. J0204CC Laid over summary abatement from February 25, 2003 at 1000 Reanev
Avenue
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
6. Summary Abatements:
J0207A2 Property clean-up for part of July 2002 to part of December 2002;
J0206V Towing of abandoned vehicles from private property for part of July
2002 and all of September 2002.
728 White Bear Avenue North (J0207A2)
Legisiative Heazing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
790 Selbv Avenue (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
1076 Ma�nolia Avenue East (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying over to the Mazch 25, 2003, Legislative
Hearing
665 Magnolia Avenue East (J0206V)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
657 Lawson Avenue East (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying this over to the April 8, 2003, Legislative
Hearing.
1111 Bush Avenue (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approvai of the assessment.
1039 Earl Street (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1075 Front Avenue (J0207A2}
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
as-�o�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF MARCH i l, 2003
489 Hatch Avenue (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
0 Lightner Place (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
Page 3
598 Maryland Avenue East (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends the assessment be reduced from $195.00 to
$75.00 pius the $45 administrative fees for a total assessment of $120.
1066 Reaney Avenue (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
925 Woodbridee Street (J0207A2, two assessments)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of both assessments.
939 Woodbrid e Street (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1 li0 Abell Street (J0206V)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
775 Ashland Avenne (J0206V)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
946 Carroll Avenue (J0206V)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
77 Front Avenue (J0206V)
Legislative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
1587 Hudson Road (J0206V)
Legislative Hearing O�cer recommends approval of the assessment.
791 York Avenue (J0206V)
Legisiative Heazing Officer recommends approval of the assessment.
819 Johnson Parkwav (J0207A2)
I.egislative Hearing Officer zecommends laying over to the March 25, 2003, Legisiative
Hearing.
482 Lawson Avenue West (J0207A2)
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends deleting the assessment.
09 -10�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING REPORT OF MARCH 1 l, 2003 Page 4
Y / 7. Resolution ordering the o�i�ner to remove or repair the property at 20 Svcamore
jl" Street East. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is
ordered to remove the building.
Legislative Hearing Officer recommends granting the owner 180 days to compiete the
rehabilitation of the property.
rr[i
O� -s °1
MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING
ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDEMNATIONS,
SUMMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMEI�iTS
Tuesday, March 1 l, 2003
Room 330 City Hall, 15 West Kellogg Boulevard
Mazcia Moermond, Legislative Heazing Officer
STAFF PRESENT: John Betz, Code Enforcement; Michael Driscoll, City Attorney's Office;
Steve Magner, Code Enforcement; Racquel Naylor, City Council Offices; Aarold Robinson,
Code Enforcement; Tchu Yajh, Planning and Economic Development
The meeting was called to order at 10:01 a.m.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 733 Charies Avenue. If
the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the
building.
(Laid over from 2-11-03)
Marcia Moermond recommends laying this over to the March 25, 2003, Legislative Heazing per a
request from staff.
J0207AIA Laid over summary abatements for property cleanup at 712 Hawthorne
Avenue and 627 Palace Avenue. (Laid over from 2-25-03Z
627 Palace Avenue
Arno A. Karner, 627 Palace Avenue, appeazed and stated it is not safe for him to work in his yazd
because of Gopher State Ethanol. He has symptoms from the plant, such as ringing in his ears.
For the most part, he does not see how the City can force him to comply and not force Gopher
State to comply. The City has not gone into Gopher State and shut them down to make them
comply with City noise ardinances.
Marcia Moermond asked what notices were issued far this property. John Betz responded orders
were issued on August 7, 2002, to remove discarded appliances and cut tall grass by August 12.
At that time, the owner appealed the orders and that appeal was denied by the City Council. The
City proceeded to remove the appliances and cut the tall grass. Now, we are here on the cost of
that removal.
Mr. Karner stated he went to court on a ticket and that was dismissed.
Ms. Moermond stated he is not allowed to subsequently appeal the assessment after the appeal of
the order was denied; however, this appeal was processed. Mr. Kamer responded if he is denied
here and gets railroaded at the City Council, he will appeal on the grounds of civil rights because
he is not getting equal justice under the law as Gopher State Ethanol. The City has taken away
his one avenue of civil disobedience and freedom of speech because he can't use a megaphone or
walk with a protest sign because of health problems he attributes to Gopher State Ethanol. The
o� -� o�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF MARCH I1, 2003 Page 2
appliances were stored safely. There was no safety concern for the tall grass and weeds. He
should not have to pay for any of this.
Ms. Moermond requested the videotape.
(A videotape was shown.)
Mr. Karner stated he stipulates that the City did the work. He does not need to see the videotape.
The only reason he did this was because this is his only way to voice his opposition. His
azgument is not that he is wrong. His argument is Gopher State Ethanol is more wrong than he
is. This is the first problem he has had with the City. It is his only way to voice his opposition to
the City's negligence in enforcing nuisance ordinances against Gopher State Ethanol.
Ms. Moermond stated what is in front of her is the condition of his yazd. It has nothing to do
with Gopher State Ethanol. He received proper notice. Mr. Karner responded he was not given a
chance to voice his opposition when he appealed the original correction order. He was told it
was irrelevant. If he is prosecuted and fined, the City is treating him under the law differently
than Gopher State Ethanol.
Ms. Moermond asked the cost of the assessment. Mr. Betz responded $729.
Ms. Moermond stated the $729 is the actual cost to the City doing this cleanup. This is not a
fine, but a biil that the City can farce payment on by assessing it on the taxes. The City cannot
charge more than what it costs to perform these services. Mr. Karner responded he does not have
to be charged. The Caty did not have to do the work. There is no real safety violation. He is
getting sick in his own home and his heazing is permanently damaged by this plant. He used to
do the yard work before Gopher State Ethanol moved in.
Ms. Moermond stated she has no control over the Gopher State Ethanol issues. She understands
he is having difficulty maintaining his yard because of health problems he amibutes to ethanol.
That would be a private issue between him and the ethanol plant. That may be something he can
pursue elsewhere. He still has to maintain his own yazd. If he cannot do it himself, he shouid see
that it is done. Mr. Karner responded that she is suggesting that he should pay someone to hurt
themselves in his yard while ihey breath the garbage from the plant. He asked who will cover his
liability insurance or should he hire a different person each time so they are not exposed to too
much. No one has answers to those types of questions. As long as Gopher State Ethanol is
exceeding the City and State noise ordinances, he is not going to go to his yazd except to get to
his caz or to his bus stop.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. She understands that Mr. Karner feels
this is civil disobedience; however, Code Enforcement officials do have to go out and enforce the
minimum property maintenance standazds. If he does do not maintain his yard, he can look
forward to additional summary abatement orders and assessments onto his taxes. She suggests
he write all seven City Councilmembers a letter explaining his position. This will be on for a
public hearing so he will be heard at that time. Looking at what she has in front of her, she has
6'3 -�o� .
LEGISLATIVE HEAItING MINIITES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 3
no reason to justify recommending a partial assessment or deleting it entirely. Mr. Karner
responded he expected the appeal to be denied. He did not get a chance to be heard last time in
front of the City Council.
712 Hawthome Avenue East
John Betz stated that the property owner is requesting to be heard along with another issue that is
before the Legislative Hearing Officer on May 13.
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the May 13, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
Laid over summary abatements from February 25, 2003:
J0207A1AA 2021 California Avenne East
J0205VW Towing of abandoned vehicles from private properties at 115 Sycamore
Street East and 123 Geranium Avenue East.
J0205VVVV Towing of abandoned vehicles at 2168 Minnehaha Avenue East.
2021 California Avenue East
(No one appeared)
Marcia Moermond stated it is her understanding that the owner could not be here. He indicated
that he had a short time to comply, and he did not think the conditions justified the abatement.
Also, these were his home business landscaping supplies and not garbage items.
(A videotape was shown.)
Harold Robinson reported the assessment was for $298. The owner calied him and said the
Parks crew picked up a new tire. Mr. Robinson picked up the tire from Pazks and brought it to
the owner's house. At the time, the owner did not seem upset about the assessment. As seen
from the videotape, it was clearly not all landscaping items.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East
(Note: this appeai will be heazd at the 130 meeting.)
123 Geranium Avenue East
(No one appeazed)
Harold Robinson reported this is about an abandoned vehicle.
oa -� o�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF MARCH i l, 2003 Page 4
Marcia Moermond recommends approvai of the assessment. She received a letter from Fred
Hoelzel, Properry Manager, who indicates that the car may or may not have belonged to a tenant
who was evicted in 2002. It would still be Mr. Hoelzel's responsibility to ensure that the vehicle
is removed from the property.
115 Sycamore Street East
Trina Smith, owner, appeared and stated the vehicle was not abandoned. She wanted to know
why she was getting charged $800 for this.
Hazold Robinson stated orders were issued on April 22, 2002, with a compliance date of May 20.
Ms. Smith responded she never received a letter teiling her to remove the car or it would be
towed. She only received a letter that if she wanted the items out of the car, she should pick
them up or the parts would be sold to pay for the towing.
Mr. Robinson stated it was a white Ford with expired tabs. It was towed on June 24. Notices
were sent to Trina Smith and [someone else] at I 15 Sycamore Street East. The mail was not
returned. If mail is returned, they make another effort to notify.
Ms. Moermond asked was something put under the windshield wiper indicating there is an
abatement order on the vehicle. Mr. Robinson responded not always.
Ms. Moermond asked if there were any abatement orders or tickets outstanding. Mr. Robinson
responded an abatement order went out on the recheck. A work order was sent on May 20 and
the vehicle was towed on June 24 by the police. There was a two month period there.
Steve Magner stated if the vehicle was claimed at the Impound Lot there would not be an
assessment because the owner pays the towing and impound fees to claim the vehicle. She
would have had an opportunity to claim the vehicle based on the letter from the Impound Lot.
Ms. Smith asked why it is $800.
(Ms. Moermond looked at a Police Tow Work Order on this property.)
Ms. Moermond stated the police costs were $775.60.
Ms. Smith stated that she was not going to get the vehicle after they towed it because there was
nothing wrong. She didn't get a ticket or something telling her that she needed to show her
records. She only received a letter telling her that she towed the caz.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. Records show that the property owner
received notice.
o� -�o�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF MARCH i l, 2003 Page 5
J0207AAAAA Laid over summary abatement from February 25, 2003:
2168 Minnehaha Avenue East
(Note: this appeal will be heard at the 130 meeting.)
J0204CC Laid over summary abatement from February 25, 2003:
1000 Reaney Avenue
(No one appeared.)
Steve Magner reported this assessment is for $56,411.01. On February 26, his office mailed a
complete statement breaking down all the costs. Included was a letter to call Mr. Magner if he
had any questions. Mr. Magner has not heard from Mr. Vallaincourt.
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. Code Enforcement has provided the
owner with the itemized bill he requested and he is not here.
Summary Abatements:
J0207A2 Property clean-up for part of July 2002 to part of December 2002;
J0206V Towing of abandoned vehicles from private property for part of July 2002
and all of September 2002.
728 White Bear Avenue North (J0207A2)
(On February 25, John Betz requested that this issue be deleted due to improper notification.)
Marcia Moermond recommends deleting the assessment.
790 Selby Avenue (J0207A2)
Steve Magner requested this be deleted.
Mazcia Moermond recommends deleting the assessment because the notice was sent to the wrong
property.
1076 Marvland Avenue East (J0207A2)
Steve Magner requested that this be laid over to Mazch 25.
Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the March 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing
O� -3 �\
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 6
665 Maenolia Avenue East (J0206�
Steve Magner requested that this be deleted.
Mazcia Moermond recommends deleting the assessment because the owner was incorrectly
assessed.
657 Lawson Avenue East (30207A2)
(Tchu Yajh provided interpreting services at this proper[y.)
The following owners appeared: Chao Xiong, 967 Galtier Street, and Mai Thao, 657 Lawson
Avenue East. Mr. Xiong stated he did not send in a green cazd and cannot attend a hearing on
March 25.
Marcia Moermond recommends laying this over to the Apri18, 2003, Legislative Heazing.
I 111 Bush Avenue (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1039 Earl Street (J0207A2)
(No one appeazed.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approvai of the assessment.
1075 Front Avenue (J0207A2)
(No one appeazed.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
489 Hatch Avenue (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
b?-1�♦
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF MARCH 1 i, 2003 Page 7
0 Liahtner Place (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
598 Maryland Avenue East (J0207A2)
Stacy Davis, owner, appeazed and stated he does not recall the CiTy doing any work. She never
received a letter, but she and a neighbor got a letter at the same time to cut weeds. Her, her son,
and a neighbor boy did that.
Harold Robinson reported on October 10, a summary abatement was issued with a pre-authorized
vehicle order, which means it goes right to Pazks and Recreation to do the work after a certain
date. Parks and Recreation cut the grass on October 15, 2002. Orders were sent to Stacy Davis
at 598 Maryland Avenue East.
Ms. Davis stated she wouid like to see the video. She never received a letter.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond recommends the assessment be reduced from $195.00 to $75.00 plus the $45
administrative fees for a total assessment of $120. The work done seems minor from the
videotape.
1076 MarS�land Avenue East (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1066 Reaney Avenue (J0207A2)
Marcia Moermond stated her paperwork shows that the City cleanup up refuse, mattress, tires,
papers, and branches for $316.
Jeazline Galloway, owner, appeared and stated she purchased the house in July. The previous
owner was suppose to take care of this. She never received a notice.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond stated they did leave a lot of woxk on the property. She asked was the agreement
that they would clean it up. Ms. Galloway responded it was suppose to be removed per the
03 -10�
LEGISLATIVE HEARTNG MINUTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 8
paperwork. She thought the previous owner came back and did the work. The City did not do a
goodjob.
Harold Robinson stated that if the items aze not identified on the original suminary abatement,
they aze careful about not taking those things. The City has lost appeals by taking too much. If
items look like they may be useful or still in good condition, they try not to take them. Usually
when the City cleans up, they clean up well.
Ms. Moermond asked when Ms. Galloway received the bill. Roxanne Flink responded the owner
has 30 days to pay without interest.
Ms. Moermond stated it seems like there were materials to be cleaned up on the property. She
would like the owner to have someihing in writing to take to the former owner to encourage them
to fulfill their obiigations. Ms. Galloway was responsible for the property when the abatement
occurred. The assessment for that will stand. If there is something the City can do to provide
documentarion to secure money from the people who really did this, the City can help with that.
Ms. Galloway asked can she make payments in installments. Ms. Moermond responded that
Real Estate staff can help her with that.
Ms. Moersnond recommends approval of the assessment. Ms. Flink added that she should check
with her title insurance to cover the cost.
925 Woodbridge Street (J0207A2, two assessments)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessments.
939 Woodbridge Street (J0207A2)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1130 Abeli Street (J0206V)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
07 •10 \
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MII3I3TES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 9
775 Ashland Avenue (J0206V)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
946 Carroll Avenue (J0206V)
The foilowing appeazed: Lynn Connolly, 554 Central Avenue West, Housing Manager for the
Public Housing Agency (PHA); and Michael Driscoil, City Attorney's Office, PHA's attorney.
Mr. Driscoll stated PHA never received notice prior to receiving the assessment notice. There
may have been a notice sent to the owner of the vehicle or to the tenant, but there was no notice
sent to the PHA. They aze usually sent to the same address as the assessment notice.
Lynn Connolly talked to a representative of PHA to see if she received a complaint. This person
would receive the original complaint and forwazd it to Ms. Connolly. This person said she did
not receive a complaint in May. Maureen, Citizen Service Office, said she had no record of a
complaint at the PHA. Mr. Betz responded the Citizen Service Office would not get notice.
Notices were issued to Martin 5mith at 955 McKnight Road South and the occupant at 946
Carroli. The ownership printout does not have PHA on it. Mr. Driscoil responded he does not
understand what printout Mr. Betz is looking at.
Steve Magner asked was there recent acquisition of this property. Since there was not proper
notification, he suggests deleting this assessment. He will give information to the AMANDA
Computer System to make sure they check these records.
Ms. Moermond recommends deleting the assessment.
77 Front Avenue (J0206V)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment.
1587 Hudson Road (J0206V)
The following appeazed: Tue Vang, owner, and Cheeney Xiong, brother-in-law.
Ms. Vang stated it is her property, but the vehicle belongs to Mr. Xiong. He does not have a
place to put his car. A police officer told them on September 12 to move the vehicle or it would
be towed. He moved the vehicle before September 12. He moved it to a different spot.
Mr. Xiong stated the complaint letter said to not pazk on the grass. He moved it from there.
o� -30�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUT'ES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 10
Hazold Robinson reported the orders were issued on August 28, 2002. The vehicle needed
current licensed tabs and it was parked on the grass. On the September 12 recheck, the vehicle
was off the grass, but still in violation. O� September 24, it still had expired tabs, so it was
towed.
Ms. Moermond asked is that how they remember it. Ms. V ang responded yes.
Ms. Moermond stated a vehicle has to have current tabs, even on private property. The
assessment will have to stand at $347.05. The owner can make payment arrangements so it can
be done over time. This is the cheapest she has seen for a vehicle tow and storage.
Mr. Xiong stated that someone at the Impound Lot said there wouid be no charge.
(Mr. Xiong showed Ms. Moermond a title.)
Mr. Robinson stated once it is offered as scrap, there aze no further charges.
Ms. Moermond asked is there any indication how he would have come to this impression. Mr.
Betz responded there would not be any charges if the vehicle was sold for enough money to
cover ail the costs.
Ms. Flink suggested holding off on the determination on this one to do further checking.
Mr. Robinson stated if the owner said he was leaving the car there, then he wouldn't pay
anything. It would be assessed.
Ms. Moermond stated she will look into this and find ont what the procedure is. Her inclination
is that staff is correct the vehicle owner wouldn't pay then and the property owner would pay
when it is assessed. She would like to find out if he was given the wrong information. She will
send him a letter and let him know what she finds out. Ms. Vang asked about interest. Ms. Fiink
expiained the process to her.
(Ms. Moermond's recommendation is approval of the assessment. Because the title was turned
over to the City, the City would not charge the vehicle owner for the tow; however, there aze still
charges for storage up to the point when the title was turned over to the City.)
791 York Avenue
Mazcia Moermond stated these are abandoned vehicles. There is a green Cadillac and a blue one.
Bill Cunnien, owner, appeazed and responded they aze not his cars and they were in the alley.
Steve Magner stated the inspectar indicated that on September 3, 2002, an inspection was
conducted and an a vehicle abatement notice was issued and mailed on September 4 to the
03-30�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 11
Cunniens at 2529 Cottage Grove Drive in Woodbury. There were two vehicles with no plates.
The inspector went back out on September 16. The vehicles were pazked on the north side of the
garage next to the alley and they were removed. Mr. Curuiien responded the north side of the
gazage would be in the alley. There is a no pazking sign there.
Ms. Moermond asked were these vehicles dumped on his properiy or near his property. Mr.
Cunnien responded they are not his vehicles.
Ms. Moermond asked is the properiy vacant, rented out, etc. Mr. Cunnien responded it was
rented out. It had a fire and bumed.
Mr. Magner stated the inspector indicates that when he was there on the 16`�, the vehicles were
moved to the north side of the garage next to the alley. When the original surmnary abatement
was issued, the vehicles were on his property. Mr. Cunnien responded that when the City towed
them, they were not on the property. They were towed from the alley.
Ms. Moermond asked were the police present for the tow. Mr. Magner responded they were.
Ms. Moermond asked are they tenant vehicles. Mr. Cunnien responded he had tenants, but he is
not sure they belonged even to the tenants. He toid the tenants to remove the vehicles.
Ms. Moermond stated he is still responsible if it is on his property. Mr. Cunnien responded it
was not on his property; it was in the alley. Mr. Magner added that this is a dead end alley.
Ms. Moermond stated she will follow up with the Police Department and the City Attorney's
Office to see who is in charge of what space and what to do in this situation. She will send him a
letter. Her guess is that the car started out on his property. Mr. Cunnien responded if he does not
have a ritle card, he cannot get rid of the vehicles. Mr. Magner responded the owner of the
property can ca11 the police department and ask for a manager's tow. They tag the vehicle and
then the owner can call a towing company. He might be charged a cost far the tow.
(Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment of $440.60 for the green Cadillaa The
property owner should be charged for the tow and storage of the green Cadillac as it was towed
from the unimproved area in the reaz of that address. The gray Cadillac should not be charged to
the property owner as it was towed from the improved area in the rear of that address; however,
there was no abatement tow sheet created for the gray Cadillac anyway.)
819 Johnson Pazkwav (J0207A2)
Racquel Naylor stated she received a call shortly before the meeting from an owner who said that
the green card was not returned.
Mazcia Moermond recommends laying over to the Mazch 25, 2003, Legislative Hearing.
03 -30!
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF MARCH 1 I, 2003 Page 12
482 Lawson Avenue West (J0207A2)
Mazcia Moermond stated this assessment is for refuse, debris, tall grass in the yazd. The work
was done on September 5, 2002.
Rod Klindworth, owner, appeazed and stated this is rental property. He would like to see the
videotape.
(A videotape was shown.)
Mr. Klindworth stated it was September 7 that it was suppose to be reinspected. He called Lisa
Martin (Code Enforcement) and got an extension to comply. They did get the boat out, which
must have been after this videotape. He probably should have been over there more often. It was
completed on September 13.
John Betz reported the work order was sent August 27. The inspector indicates the property
owner called on September 6 who explained it was rental property, he would be returning on
Monday, and he would take care of it by September 13. Mr. Betz presumes he meant the boat.
The work had been done on September 5. Mr. Klindworth responded the officer was supposed to
reinspect on September 7. He got it done on September 13. The boat was gone when he got
there. He had that removed.
(Ms. Moermond looked at the letter Mr. Klindworth is refening to.)
Ms. Moermond stated this is a correction notice dated August 27. That would be different than
the summary abatement order that would have precipitated this assessment. There should be
auather letter dated the same time.
Steve Magner stated the summary abatement inspection was conducted on August 9, 2002, with
a compliance date of August 15. This is for a boat and trailer. These were mailed to Saint Paul
Postal Employee Credit, 2401 McKnight Road North and to the occupant at 482 Lawson Avenue
West. The boat one was also sent to Roderick Klindworth, 482 Lawson. Mr. Klindworth
responded he does not live there. It was homesteaded when he got it.
Mr. Magner asked when he purchased the property. Mr. Klindworth responded he thinks he has
had it at least six years.
Mr. Magner stated the correction norice was sent to Robert Klindworth, P.O. Box 452, South
Saint Paul, but the summary abatement was sent to Lawson. Mr. Magnex suggests deleting the
assessment because Code Enforcement did not mail the summary abatement to him and for some
reason the correction notice was mailed on the same or similar date.
Mr. Klindworth stated he has quite a few buildings and he does take care of them.
03 -30�
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF MARCH I 1, 2003 Page 13
Ms. Moermond recommends deleting tl�e assessment. She suggested he clean up the address
problems so it is not shown up inadvertently as being homesteaded. Roxanna Flink stated that
unless he goes in and makes it nonhomesteaded, then it will stay that way until something
happens.
Resolution ordering the o�vner to remove or repair the property at 20 Svtamore Street
East. If the owner fails to compiy with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to
remove the building.
Steve Magner reported this is a two story, wood frame, single family dwelling. It was
condemned on March 25, 2002, and vacant since then. There have been six summary abatement
notices issued to secure doors and windows, remove refuse, and cut tall grass. On January 7,
2002, an inspection of the buiiding was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a
nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance
building was issued on January 13, 2003, with a compliance date of January 29. As of this date,
the properry remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative
code. The vacant building fees were paid. A citation was issued on August 20, 2002, charging
the previous owner with failure to pay the annual vacant building fee. Real estate t�es are paid.
Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $4,800 on the land and $2Q200 on the
building. On March 4, 2003, a code compliance inspection fee was paid. A$2,000 bond was
posted on March 10. Code Enforcement estimates the cost to repair is $80,000 to $100,000;
estimated cost to demolish is $7,000 to $8,000.
Mr. Magner went on to say that the property is in a state of neglect and disrepair. A number of
people have illegally occupied the building. Measures have been taken to enforce the
condemnation on this dwelling. The previous owners just transferred ownership. His office
would not be opposed to the new owner having time to rehabilitate the property as long as he
completes the project within 180 days, brings the building into code compliance certificate
requirement, and maintains the yazd and the walks.
Mazcia Moermond asked about the time period for the summary abatements. Mr. Magner
responded the rash of them happened over the last three months as they were coming to a resolve
with the previous owner.
Bee Vue, 1292 Donegal Drive, Woodbury, appeazed and stated his plans are to fix up the
property.
Ms. Moermond asked has he had a code compliance inspection conducted. Mr. Vue responded
he has. The inspection has been done, but he only has a draft of it.
Ms. Moermond asked is it a dangerous structure. Mr. Magner responded yes, based on the
condition of the property.
03 -30 �
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF MARCH 11, 2003 Page 14
Ms. Moermond asked has he pulied a building permit. Mr. Vue responded he tried to do that
yesterday. The code compliance inspection was not ready, so he was not able to get the permit
yesterday. He should be able to pull the permit today.
Ms. Moermond asked has he done other kinds of rehabilitation projects like this. Mr. Vue
responded he has. Mr. Magner responded he has done some before, but Mr. Magner would like
to emphasize that the project has to be completed within the time frame of the bond and the yard
has to be maintained. Also, he cannot have occupancy until the code compliance has been signed
off.
Ms. Moermond stated he should work closely with the inspectors. This is a dangerous structure,
and the City Council is not likely to give any leeway. Mr. Vue responded the property is not in
danger structurally. The first week, he cleaned out the whole house except for the basement.
Mr. Magner responded it might not be in an immediate peril of collapsing, but a police officer
partially fell through the front porch. The rear edition has rotted through to the point that a finger
could be pushed through the siding.
Ms. Moermond recommends granting the owner 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the
property.
The properties listed below have already been ratified by the City Council.
367 Bates Avenue (J0207A)
(No one appeazed.)
Racquel Naylor said the owner called and was not able to attend this hearing for health reasons
but would like to appeal this.
(A videotape was shown.)
Ms. Moermond stated she would like to follow up with the owner. That can be done via
telephone or scheduling an April heazing. So far the finding is that there was junk that needed to
be removed. She needs to hear why this was not taken caze of in a timely manner and if she
received notice.
713 Bedford Street (J0207A, J0207B, J0205V)
(No one appeared.)
Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessments.
The meeting was adjoumed at 11:53 a.m.
rrri
CLTiZEN SERVICE OFFICE
Dona[d!. Luna, Ciry Clerk
DNISION OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT
Andy Dnwkins, Progrnm Nlnnnger
CITI' OF SAINT PAUL Nuisance Building Code Ertforcemen[
Randy G Kelly, Mayor 1600 North Wh[re Bear Avertue Tel.� 6il-266-I900
SainlPaul,bfY55(06 Faz:651-266-19?6
February 21, 2003
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
Council President and
Members of the City Council
03 — �o�
�O
Cc��t��s€ a w��.-.�h ; ° -
; . a, �, � 2�a3
Citizen Service Office, Vacant/Nuisance Buildin�s Enforcement Division has requested the City
Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution orderin� the repair or removal of the
nuisance building(s) located at:
20 Sycamore Street East
The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearin�s as follows:
Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, March 11, 2003
City Council Hearing - Wednesday, March 26, 2003
The owners and responsibie parties of record are:
Name and Last Known Address
Dorothy M. Doolittle
20 Sycamore Street East
St. Paul, MN 55117-5559
Interest
Fee Owner
Dorothy M. Doolittle,
C!O Marie Roozen �
�95 Ha�vthome Avenue East
St. Paul. NI� »101
Cirv of Saint Paul
C/O City Cler�
City Hall Room 170
15 West Kello�g Boulevard
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Fee Owner
�foTease Li.n Holder
AA-ADA-HEO Employer
20 Sycamore Street East
February 21, 2003
Pa�e 2
Name and Last Known Address
HRA Project Services
25 4�' Street W. 12`" Floor
St. Paul, NIN 55102
Bee Vue
1292 Donegal Drive
Woodbury, NN 55125
The legal description of this property is:
Interest
03 -3
Mortgage Lien Holder
Fee Owner
Lot 11, Block 3, Drake's 2" Addition to the City of St. Paul.
Division of Code Enforcement has declared this buildin�(s) to constitutz a"miisance" 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 correctin� the deficiencies or by
razing and removing this buildin�(s).
Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains
unabated, the community continues to suffer the blighting influence of this property. It is the
recommendation of the Division of Code Enforcement that the City Council pass a resolution
ordering the responsible parties to either repair, or demolish and remove this building in a timely
manner, and failin� 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,
�O
i i � � / I �� �
Steve Magner
Vacant Buildin�s Supervisor
Division of Code Enforcement
Citizen Service Office
Sl'Lm1
cc: Frank Berg, Buildino Inspzction and Design
Meghan Riley, City Attomeys Office
Nancy Anderson, Assistant Secretary to the Council
Laurie Kaplan, PED-Housin� Division
AA-ADA-EEO Employer