Loading...
03-674City of St. Paul R&SOLUTION RATIFYING ASSESSMENT (� �'-� COUNCI FILE NO.�__`�_���� , By File No. SEE BELOW Assessment No. SEE BELOW �+ Voting Ward In the matter of the assessment of benefits, cost and expenses for J0302AA (9941) Summary abatement (property clean-up) during the month of February 2003 for the propertZr located at 1004 Bush Ave. LAID OVER BY COUNCIL ON 6-4-03 TO 7-2-03 LSGISLATIVE HEARING WAS 6-23-03 A public hearing having been had upon the assessment for the above improvement, and said assessment having been further considered by the Council, and having been considered finally satisfactory, therefore, be it RSSOLVED, That the said assessment be anci the same is hereby in all respects ratified. RESOLVED FURTHER, That the said assessment be and it is hereby determined to be payable in One equal installments. � COUNCILPERSON Yeas Nays t/ Benanav ✓ Blakey ✓ Bostrom Coleman— ��e�� ✓ Harris �In Favor ✓ Lantry ,/ Reiter �/Against � ��P�� Adopted by the Council: Date ��,� l/� Certified Passes by Council Secretary 03-;?� � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � u� �, �00� DepartmenUoffi /counc' 1 � Date Initiated: I - (E — TechnologyandManagemen[Serv i 26JUN-03 ; Green Sheet NO: 3001983 Contact Person & Phone• Bruce Engelbrekt 2668854 �i9 � � Assign Number For Routing Order Be on Council Agenda by (DaYe): ueoartmenc �eni �orerson 0 �Technoloev and Mana¢emeot S � 1 Council � i�ancvAnderson I Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature) Action Requested: This item was laid over by Council on June 4, 2003 to July 2, 2003, Sununary abatement (property clean-up) during the month of February 2003 for properry at 1004 Sush Ave. File J0302AA ioanons: v,pprove �H� or rce�ea �rq: Planning Gommission CIB Committee Civil Service Commission rersona� serv�ce contrecis must answer tne ronow�ng Ruest�ons: 1. Has this personlfirm ever worked under a contract for this department? Yes No 2. Has tfiis person/firm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this personifrm possess a skill not normally possessed by any current city employee? Yes No Explain ali yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet � Initiating Problem, Issues, OppoRunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): "SEE ORIGINAL GREEN SHEET NUMBER 204138" AdvanWaes If Approved: DisadvanW�es If ApDroved: '�� DisadvanWgeslfNotApproved: I �oWlAmountof 306 Transaction: Funding Source: , Financiallnformation: ', (Explaia) CostlRevenue Budgeted: Activiry Number: 1 property owner will be norified of the public hearing and charges. City of St. Paul Real Estate Division Dept. of Technology & Manageanenti Serv RSPORT OF COMPLETION OF ASSSSSMSNT COUNCIL FILE NO. File No. SEE BELOW Assessment No. SEE BELOW 03 -y ;,, F �J; =; , Voting Ward In the matter of the assessment of benefits, cost and e�enses for J0302AA (9941) Summary abatement (property clean-up) during the month o£ Februaxy 2003 for the property located at 1004 Bush Ave. LAID OVER BY COUNCIL ON 6-4-03 TO 7-2-03 LEGISLATIVE HEARING hTAS 6-23-03 To the Council of the City o£ St. Paul The Valuation and Assessment Engineer hereby reports to the Council the following as a statement o£ the expenditures necessarily incurred for and in connection with the making of the above improvement, viz: Total costs Charge-Code Enforcement Abatement Service Charge $261.00 $25.�0 $20.00 TOTAL EXPENDITURES Charge To Net Assessment $306.00 $306.00 Said Valuation and Assessment Engineer further reports that he has assessed and levied the total amount as above ascertained, to-wit: the sum of 5306.00 upon each and every lot, part or parcel of land deemed benefitted by the said improvement, and in the case of each lot, part or parcel of land in accordance with the benefits conferred thereon; that the said assessment has been completed, and that hereto attached, identified by the signature of the said Valuation and Assessment Engineer, and made a part hereof, is the said assessment as completed by him, and which is herewith submitted to the Council for such action thereon as may be considered AroPer_ Dated � Z � � �p✓ Val a Engineer � GI Q a a a a � � ri C � � � E � m � 0 m N � 0 M � w 0 ; � � Q.a H i O ^� � C � � M W�N � R� � N O o.' � m a�N � � �m i N (p � O O O II O i H� o 0 o n o� Z � • n � � .iNO 1110 i � � l0 N N II O i � N i?tR II rl i �v2 nv?� � n a n O �i � E. n U � II Q 11 W ; II i N� o O O � Ei I 000 H � O O O z � O O O � 1 r1 ri fl I � 1D O�N E � V � i i w� � � w�000 � F� o00 �000 i u� i ,-+ ui o F � N N � H�� � ✓ � i �i ' W W W �q C� � H C4 i W � FC £ FC ��a � 2C�U �hxw a�xu� ���x� U i E Ufk FC � � W W i W i Ul C U] � 1 � � w I � � w I 1 Q I � � � w t-� a � � xz •a o � �'oz`� ; � H I Q U H(] � E�E $2 � a � �� � a�oao� U � t� <C .� � tn i E GL W N� W � t+ F N � � Q � q •aC0 � C]EFi-7�.' � N � r�mm a � H i W cq i .Ki 1 C1� (V � � W�- O N N i O�arm��i w�w� �o�� �HU�aa� � � � � "' o� � � a� N N � � U c1 � z o N � a' i i-+ o o� w i M i �y' i W M W W i L Y L , � ,'L N' � i v� W N N � m i E � o£al� � a � �c� 5c� � o � v,mz � �axz �� a � wo�-.�o � w��wxoz� z�z� aow� o � na ° � 0 0 o il o 00o ii o . p . ri itl o II lO �O N N II O N 1? LT II M N II u� •W W ii E N a n �WOxii �C U U il C £xjii0 �Ulk ii H �av�iriF IIV aaanw aFCt nh FEH II O 000na H E F u W � a w u a a E w � X W 0 � a w V a a .i 03- ���� f �C�3-(�� �- REPORT Bate: 3uly 8, 2003 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Room 330 City Hall 15 West Kellogg Boulevazd LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVElREPAIR, CONDENINATIONS, SUMMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, ABATEMENT ASSE3SMENTS Marcia Moermond Legislative Hearing Officer 1. Laid over summary abatements JU303A1 Property Cleanup during March 2t103 at 595 Edmund Avenue; 3fl303A3 Property Cleanup during March 2093 at 422 Jessamine Avenue East. 545 Edmund Avenue Legisia#ive Hearing Officer reco�ends reduc3ng the assessment from $297 to $152 plus the $45 adntinistrative f�es for a tatal assessment of $197. 422 Jessamine Avenue East Legislauve Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 2. 303TRr�SH1Q PravidE weekiy garbage hauling service for the �irsL quarter of 2003; JD304A Pra�ert�* siean-up for part of Apr's120a3. 483 Ariington Avenue East (J0304A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 104 Larpenteur Avenue West (J03TRASHi Q) Legisla#ive Hearing (3ffirzr recommends reducing the assessmenT from $120 to $50 plus the $20 serwic� f� �c3r a tc�� assessineni of $7�. 105 Manitoba Avenue (J0304Aj Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. 876 Rice Street (J0304A) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approvai of The assessment. 10941is�ss �iaen�ae {�03fl�4�1� Legis2ative �Iear;�g f�icex r�m�a��s a�oval of t� a�sessmeni. 3. Resolufion ordering the owner to remove or repair t�e property at 837 Fourth Street East. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Recommendation is forthcoming.) D3-��`� LEGISLATNE HEARING REPORT OF JULY 8, 2003 Page 2 4. Resolufion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1819 Sheridan Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the buitding. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the resolution. '�' S. Laid over summary abatemenY: 30302AA Praperiy cleanup daring February 2003 at 1004 Bush Avenue. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval of the assessment. rrn b3 /� REPORT Date: 3une 23, 2003 Time: 10 a.m. Place: Room 330 City Hall I S West Kellogg Boulevard LEGISLATIVE HEARING Marcia Moermond Legislative Hearing Officer J0303AA Property clean-up at 1237 Matilda Street. (Laid over Summary Abatement Asessment from 6-10-03.) Legislative Hearing Qfficer recommends that the City divide the total assessment ($288) over a five (5)-year time period so that the owner could pay it in installments. 2 Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 794 Dayton Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends that the building be removed or repaired in thirry (30) days. � 3. J0301 V V Property clean-up at 1004 Bush Avenue. (Laid over Summary Abatement Assessment from 5-13-03.) Legislative Hearing Officer recommends laying it over to the July 8, 2003 Legislative Hearing. (Note: At the meeting, the Legislative Heazing Officer's recommendation was denial as the owner did not appear; however, the owner called later and requested to be heard.) 4. Appeal of Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate dated June 12, 2003 at 1096 Lawson Avenue East. Legisiative Hearing Officer recommends denial of the appeal. 5. Appeal of Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate dated June 13, 2003 at 214 Kine Street West. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends denial. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 627 Palace Avenue. Legislative Heazing Officer recommends laying over to a Special Legislative Hearing scheduled for 830 a.m. Wednesday, 7une 25, 2003. z�. MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATNE HEARING d3 �01 � ORDERS TO REMOVEJREPAIR, CONDEMI3ATIONS Si3MMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS Tuesday, July 8, 2003 Room 330 City Hall, 15 West Kellogg Boulevazd Mazcia Mcermond, L.egisiative Hearing O�cer The hearing was called to order at 1 � A3 a.m. STAFF PI2ESF_NT_ Steve Mag�er, Tony Novak, and Harold Robinson, Code Enforcement Marcia Moermcmd s�a3ed slae w�ii woa�C on recoanmendations for the City Council on how to handle ail of the u3ait�ers o� tli� agenda today. All of these issues will have a public hearing in front ofthe City Council because they a2I involve money or properry rights. � Laid over summary abatemeni: J0302AA Properly cleannp at 100A Bus� Avenue (No one appeared. This issue was discussed at the end of the hearing after the owner anived.) Laid over summary abatements 303D3At Property Cleanup at 595 Edmund Avenue 30303A3 Property cleanup at 422 Jessamine Avenue East (City Councit referred this matter back to the Legislative Hearing Officer) 422 3essamane Avenae Easl {No one appeared. This issue was discussed at the end of the hearing after the owner arrived.) 595 Edmund Avenue (Laid over from 6-10-03} Marcia Moermond staied the City did a property cleanup a# this address for bags of yazd waste and debris in the yard. The owner wrote a letter to t�udy Dawkins (Code Enforcement) on June 10. The assessment is $252 plus $45 administrative costs. (A videoYape was shown.) Ms. Moerznond stated orders were ma�ed mn ivlarch 2i with a compliance date of March 26. The foI�o�s'r�a appeared: Karla Johnson, owner, and Mr. Reynolds, friend. Ms. Johnson stated she resesvgd ��ettet on March 22. She called Lisa Martin (Code Enfarcement) on March 24. Ms. 3ahnson works three jobs and is a great grandmother. Mr. Reynolds, who is staying at her house, is a recovered heart surgery patient. He cut the grass and trimmed the hedges. That is why the bags were by the sides of the gazage. He did everything he couid physically do. She asked for an extension from Ms. Martin. Ms. Johnson thought it was vezy short notice from Saturday morning to Wednesday to do the cleanup, �3 �� � LEGISLATNE HEARTNG MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2003 Page 2 Ms. Moermond asked about any indication of a phone call. Harold Robinson responded it was after the work was done. Ms. Johnson responded she called the inspector from work on Monday morning. Mr. Robinson stated that on Apri12, there was a voice mail and the inspector spoke to the properry owner regazding the work order. The owner was not sure what day her yard was cleaned up, but she thought it was Saturday. The owner felt that the City was tazgeting her, and the work was done. Ms_ Johnson stated she ta�ked to the in�peetor Monday �orning. She also talked to Mr. Dawkins because the inspector said she laad to }9ave scr�s on the windows. `i'here was snow on the ground, so she did not need screens on the windows. Ms. Moermond responded the City Code is not season-specific. The City Code requires the screens regardless. Ms. Johnson stated she called the ins�ector on Monday, March 31, because the bags were gone on Friday. The inspector said that she had no knowledge of any of this. If the City picked up the bags, it is unclear how the inspector did not know about it. Mr. Robinson responded the work arder was sent on March 27. Parks cleaned the yard on March 28. The summary abatement was mailEd on the 21 This was complaint-based, and the inspection was done on March 20. Ms. Moermond asked about a history of #his property. Mr. Robinson responded there was an order issued on May l, 2000, for exterior maintenance. There were no orders for refuse or debris. Ms. Maermond stated she is hearing Ms. 3ohnson say that she had asked for an extension. Ms. Johnson's letter says that she talked to Ms. Martin, who said she would go to the property on March 26 to see how it was going. She did that, did not see enough progress, and had the wark order issued. It is a matter of miscommunication. Ms. Johnson responded the work was done. It just needed to be hauled away. She works two jobs. She physically cannot do it, and Mr. Reynolds did the best he could. He trimmed tiie bushes aad tlae hedge on the grogerCy line and cut the grass, but she told him the notice said nothing about that. Ms. Moermond asked what is on the summary abatement order and what needed to be cleaned up. Mr. Robinson responded the sunuuary abaYemenT order says to "Remove im�roperly stored or acc�mulat� refuse including: garbage, rubbis3�, discarded f�rs�ituce, appliances, vehicle parts, scrap woo$ and metal, recyclia�g �uateria�, household items, building materiais or rubble, tires, brush, eic. from yasct az�zase" Mr. ReynoTds stated the City picked up the bags that he placed by the gazage to be hauled off the next day. Ms. Johnson stated she got the letter on a Saturday, she called the inspector on a Monday. 5he assumed everything was understood. The following Saturday, they planned to dispose of everything. Everyday there was more progress. The hedges were trimmed, the yard was cut. She cannot do it with the hours that she works. Ms_ Moermond responded the line of argument o� LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2003 Page 3 that "she cannot do it" says that she is not responsible for maintaining the property. What Ms. Moermond is willing to do is take $1�0 offthe assessment. It ls reasonable that Ms. Johnson was confused about what was agreed upon and may have been vague when she called on Monday. There is no record of that cail, but there aze records of other calls that she made. Ms. Johnson asked about the her rocks. Ms. Moermond responded she can go to Aisk Management for help with that. Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from $297 to $152 plus the $45 administrative fees for a total assessment of $197. J03TRASHIQ Proviile weekly garbage hauling service for the first quarter of 2003; J0304A Property clean-up for part of April 2Q03. 483 Arlington Avenue East (30304A) (No one appeared.) Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. 104 LarQenteur Avenue Wesi (J03Ti2ASA1� Paul TesYOr, owner, agpeared and stated he ordered trash pickup service the first of the yeaz. He was using his barrel and nat nsing the City bazrel anymore. They City picked up their barrel on 7anuary 10 or 15. He was charged far two extra weeks. He called the City once or twice. Mazcia Moermond responded that the City turns off their service once they have a record of the owner calling and proving there is private garbage service at the property. Harold Robinson reported they staried garbage service about September 27, 2002. $FI was called on 3anuary 10, 2003, and the City container was removed on Januaty 10. Ms. Maermond asked whether he used �he garUage container those last two weeks. Mr. Testor responded that he did. Steve Magner reported the Suuunary Abatement Order says the City requires a written notice mailed to thzir office indicating the carraer. `Ihere has to be confumartion to stop the service. They do not drive by on a weekly basis. Ms. Nloetmmanc3 stated that when Mr. Testor's sister was here at a previous legislative hearing, they talked about the assessment for the other garbage service for the third quarter of 2002. The City incurred the cost of providing the gazbage service. Ms. Moermond could do one of two things: 1) divide the assessment over five yeazs; 2) push back the payment of the assessment until he sells the property because of his disability. He would not have to pay it all until the property is sold. The interest chazged is 4.75%. o�-� LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JULY 8, 2003 Page 4 Mr. Testor stated his sister was holding his paycheck. She would not make payment when he wanted her to, and it took ten weeks for him to talk her into getting trash service. She was also mismanaging his checkbook, so he took the checkbook back. He is going to pay his assessment in full today or next week. He just does not want to pay for that last week. Ms. Robinson stated the inspector said to give nofice to Pazks on January 10 to cease pickup. The notice does take sometune to get through. They e-maii and send regular mail to Parks. Ms. Moer�ond stated her nofice says the charge is $120. She asked how many pickups that wouid entail. Ms. Robinson respon�ed two. Ms. Moermond stated she wili reduce the assessment from $12Q to $SQ ptus the $2Q service fee for a total assessment of $70. The owner should not be charged for the last week of garbage service. 106 Manitoba Avenue {J0304A) Marcia Moermond stated her notice says that there aze discarded furniture, appliances, vehicles parts, household items, refuse, and debris on the property. She asked if this property has been at a legislative hearing previously. Steve Magner responded it was tom down by the City a long time ago. Nura Hassan, owner, appeared and stated she has garbage service with BFI. They told her to get everything out, and said they would haul the next day, but it was a week before they came out. They charged her $400 for hauling things. (A videotape was shown.) Ms. Moermond stated thase items were not picked up by her garbage service. She asked if those items were left by the garbage service. Ms. Hassan responded she does not laiow. This was regular garbage that overflowed. She asked if the caz is considered garbage. 1Via�. Robinson responded that iT was not; the car was not abated. Ms. Moermond asked whether she called the City to let them know she had garbage service and she would like them to pick up these items. Ms. Hassan responded the garbage was picked up prioz to the deadline. She did not think it was necessary to cal3 the City. Ms. M�ffinond stated there wer� items she picked up after the deadline. It looks ]ike the City did the �ves� She can affer spreading the assessment over five years so it is more affordable. Ms. Hassan responded she did not understand what the City picked up. Ms. Moermond asked if she would like to see the videotape again. Ms. Hassan responded yes. (The videotape was shown again.) o�-���} LEGISLATIVE HEA.RING MINiITES OF JIJLY 8, 2003 Page 5 Mr. Robinson stated the inspector did note that some of the items were removed and some remained. She should go a8er the BFI hauler for a rebate. Ms. Hassan responded she is disappointed because BFI shouidn't have left anything behind. She will pay the assessment all at once. She requested a note saying that the City picked up things after BFI came out. Mr. Robinson responded they can work something out. Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. 876 Rice Street (J0304A) (No one appeazed.) Mazcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessmenx 1094 Ross Avenue (J0304A) Mazcia Moermond stated this case is about "rubbish, oillfuel tank, discarded furniture, gzill, mattress, wood, etc." and the owner was notified March 27. The City asked that it be taken care of within a week, but the work was not done until Apri125. Haroid Robinson reported they spoke to the properiy owner on April 3, who requested an extension, which was granted. The recheck was done April 17. Some of the items were gone; others were st111 there. Maselino L. Tavale, owner, appeazed and stated he talked to Mr. Vang. Mr. Tavale ordered a durnpster to pick up everything. He moved the aluminum cans in back to recycle them. He was going to use the shingles for the porch. Everything else was cleaned up. The City picked up the aluminum cans which he was going to take to the recycling on Friday. He needs the money. He cannot do all the wark at once, and he cannot afford a contractor, so he does a little bit at a time. It was stacked neatly. (A videotape was shown.) Ms. Moermond stated it looksd like he did some cleanup. Mr. Tavale responded the only thing the crew picked up � tl�e recycling. The City left the shingles covered ivith boards. Ms. Moermond responded it looked like ttae City picked up ffiore tl� reeyciing. Mr. Robinson responded t}te City 3ef€ t�ne new shingles. Ms. Moefmond reported the City did the work a month later. The owner should have known it needed to be done. It looked like he had plenty o£ opportunity to complete the cleanup. He can file with Risk Management to ciaim money for the shingles and the recycling. She can recommend that the assessment be paid over five years. Mr. Tavale responded the recycling was going to be taken during that day, and the City came in the morning to pick it up. Ms. Moermond responded it had been a month since he was told to pick it up and a week after he had negotiated an extension. Also, Mr. Tavale could have let the City know he needed another o���z�{ LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003 Page 6 extension. Mr. Robinson added that the recycling materials aze clearly stated on the suminary abatement order. Mr. Tavaie stated it does not cost $250 to remove recycling and materials. He paid $250 for the dumpster. Ms. Moermond responded it is a lot cheaper for an owner to remove it. The owner did not keep up his end by having these Things taken care of by the new deadline. Also, he did not call the City to let them know he covld not finish in time. Mr. Tavale stated that the inspector did not send a letter saying the deadline was a certain date. Ms. Moermond responded he did not need to do that. It was cleaz Mr. Tavale had called and atranged that later date. Mr. Tavale stated it was nat fair tiiat he paid for a dumpster, and then the City charged him $250 to take away the recycling and tt�e shingles. He put in a new garage for $12,000 last year. There are other neighbors that have worse yazds. Ms. Moermond asked if this was a complaint-based inspection or part of a sweep. Mr. Robinson responded it was complaint-based. Mr. Tavale stated he did his part. Ms. Moermond responded the City does not think he did his part. He has some options: i) he can have the assessment spread over five yeazs, 2) he can file a form with the City and explain his disability, which will postpone the payment of this until he sells #he properiy, or 3) he can go to the City Council on July 23 and ask them to decrease or eliminaie 3he a�,sessment. Mr. Tavale responded he will appeal on July 23. Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 837 Fourth Street East, If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Steve Magner submitted photographs.) Steve Magner reported the building was condemned July 2002 and it has been vacant since then. The current owner is Rachei A. Lyons, who has been deceased since Aprii i6, 1991. There haue been six sun��nary abatemer�E n�fi�rzs issued to secure the garage vehicle door, remove abandoned vehicle, zemove sno�w andlor ice from the public sidewalk, and cut tall grass. On Apri130, 2003, an inspection af the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which consfitute a nuisance conrlition was developed, and photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on May 8, 2003, with a compliance date of 3une 9. As of this date, this property remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the Legislative Code. The vacant building fees are due. A citation was issued chazging the owner with failure to pay the annual vacant building fee. Real estate taYes are unpaid in the amount of $1,198 total for the yeazs 2002 and 2003. Taxation has piaced an estimated mazket value of $12,300 on the land and $54,300 on the building. A Code Compliance Inspection was applied for on June 16, 2003. A LEGISLATIVE HEARING MIN[1TES OF JULY 8, 2003 o�-��u� Page 7 bond has not been posted as of today. Code Enforcement estimates the repairs to be $80,000 to $90,000. The estimated cost to demolish is $7,000 to $8,000. This is a resolution for a 15 day order to repair or remove this structure. The foilowing appeared Dorothy Lyons and William Lyons, Ms. Lyons' son. Ms. Lyons responded she wants to repair it because it is repairable. Ms. Moermond stated she sees a lot of problems with the lustory of this house. The City had to board this building, the vacant building fees have not been paid, a citation has been written far that, and real estate taYes are owed of $1,198 for the yeazs 2002 and 2003. All these things tell Ms. Moermond that the owners will have trouble completing the repair plan. She will want to see these issues addressed before she will consider a recommendation to the City Council for more time. Ms. Lyons stated there was an inspection in 1992 and 1994. Everytl�ing was done except the electrical. They put on a new roof, painted the house, and put in new storm windows and screens in 1992 and 1994. Ms. Lyons stated she has been keeping ihe t�es up-to-date. She intends to get a code compliance inspection. All that she is asking today is to table it unfil another reading until she gets the code compliance report from Jim Seeger (License, Inspections, Environmental Protection [LIEP]). Ms. Moermond stated this issue is set to go to public heazing before the City Councii on .iuly 23. She wouid like to lay this over to the July 22 Legislative Hearing. Within two weeks, there should be a code compliance inspection report. Also, she wouid like to see the taxes paid by then, and a$2,�OQ bond posted. Ms. Lyons stated someone toid her it had been vacant for a while, but that is erroneous. Her furniture is still in there. Ms. Moermond responded what is in front of her now is the order to remove or repair. Staff has said it was condemned in July 2002. It does not matter whether it was occupied when ii was condemned. It is the ccondition of the building that merited the condenmation. The condemnafion is not in from of her right now. They did not appeal the condemnation or the appeal was not successful. This is the way it has come to her ri�t now. Ms. Lyons stated she was upset when she saw a sign posted that it was vacated. It has always been occupied. She is taking care of the property. It is in the hisYorical area She could not get the electrical done plus she needed money to repair #he housE. Ms. Moerman�d sTated afit "ss no1 possible to have everyt}�i� done, she will try to work with Ms. Lyons, but she would like to see a good faith effort put forth to get things done. The public hearing before the City Council will be the following day. Ms. Moermond asked whether they have enough help in terms of programs and assistance. Mr. Lyons responded they will look into it. Ms. Moermond stated they will taik about this in two w: eks if they cannot find the assistance they need. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003 o�-c� Page 8 Ms. Lyons stated the property is in probate and that puts a blockage on the issue to a certain extent. If the property was in her name, it would be a different story. Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the July 22, 2003, Legislative Hearing for the following to be done: 1) a Code Compiiance Inspection completed, 2) a work plan indicating how all the items on the Code Compliance Inspection Repart will be completed 3) a financial plan showing evidence of financial ability to complete the items on the Code Compliance Inspection Report, 4) real estate taxes paid, 5) a$2,000 performance bond posted, 6) vacant building fces paid, and 67 Yhe citation for failure to pay the vacant building fees should be taken care of. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair #he pro�erly aY 1819 Sheridan Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolufion, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. (Steve Magner submitted photographs,) The following appeazed: Diane and Bob Trudrowski, 9052 Bush Lake Road, Bloomington. Ms. Trudrowski stated she is the stepdaughter of Florence E. Walz, and has power-of-attorney over Ms. Walz's personai matters; however, she does not have power-of-attorney over the house. Ms. Walz is indigent. She was placed iu a nursing home in about 1997. The property was signed over by a quick claim deed to her grandson Scott Walz in 1989. He resided at that property from 1987 to present. Ms. Trudrowski found out Mr. Walz had not paid the taYes. She paid the ta�ces and The assessment, even though Ms. Walz had vacated ihe building. Ms. Trudrowski ceased paying in 2QflI. At this point, she does not know what her options are. There is a remote chance Ms. Walz will go back to the house. It is Ms. Trudrowski's understanding that if the property were sold, 51% would go to the State and 49% would go to Scott Walz. Mr. Trudrowski stated they have ihe means to fis up the property. Ms. Moermond asked who is Scott Walz. Ms. Trudrowski responded he is gainfutdy empioyed. Mr. Magner responded they have a mailing address for him. Ms. Tsudraevski s-�ated she saw Mr.1Vlagaier w�en she was there geiti�g some personal things inside the building for Flo�nce Wa1z. She would iike to know her options. She cannot rent it out because it has been grandfat�ered in. Steve Magner reported the buiiding was condemned April 2003 and has been vacant since May i, 2003. The current property owner is Scott A.Walz. There have been six summary abatement nofices issued to remove gazbage, cut tall gass, remove roofing material, and repair or remove the gutter that is partially blocking public sidewalk. On Aprll 21, 2003, 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 Apri124, 2003, with a compliance date of May 27, 2003. The property remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. Vacant building fees aze due for �� �� � LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003 Page 9 2002 and 2003. Real estate taYes of $3,070 for the years 2001, 2002,and 2003 are unpaid. Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $11,700 on the land and $54,100 on the buiiding. Neither a Code Compliance Inspection nor bond have been obtained or applied for as of today. Code Bnforcement is seeking a resolution to repair or remove this structure. Mr. Magner stated he met Ms. Trudrowski at the properiy. The buiiding has suffered from severe lack of maintenance. The major ptoblem is the roof has failed and is allowing moisture to enter. He advised Ms. Trudrowski that it is not a good idea to be in the building because of the exYensive moFd growth and the hazardous conditions of the floors rotted out in some areas. This building would i�ave to be gutteci down io the b�e walls and studs to be rehabilitated. If the building was razed, she does not know whether the building departcnent wauid allow a building on that site because it is a small lot. Ms. Trudrowski asked does Yhe building have to meet the 30 foot criteria. Mr. Magner responded there is a frontage criteria and a square footage criteria, and there aze some parameters to the adjacent buildings. The problem they see there is that the adjoining homes are at a higher elevation and this lot drops off down toward the street and the northwest corner of the lot. The City would probably require fuil plans for rebuilding on it. If someone was to come in today and apply for code compliance inspection, and the City Council decided to give the owner 180 days, the progerty could be saved. If that does not happen and the house is torn down, it would be up to the building de�sartment and the zoning department af LTEP to aiTow rebuilding on that site. Mr. Trudrowski asked does he have the right to ask LIEP if they would they allow rebuilding on the ]ot Mr. Magner responded that is general public information. That office would need to know the address and check the site. , Ms. Moermond stated they are grandfathered in for the setbacks. Mr. Magner added that as long as the house is existing. Ms. Moermond asked if there was a provision about the house being rehabilitated at more than 50% of the value, the new zoning criteria would come into play. Mr. Magner res�nded they need to inquixe about thai vvith LIEP. Ms. Trudrowski asked about a quick claim deed. Mr. Magner responded there is an issue with the ownerstup. LIEP will not accept a bond from someone who is not the ownea unless the owner staSes in writing #Iae ather person can post a boncl Ms. i�oermond responded that if they had power-of-attomey over the house, Yhey co�id apply for all of this on behalf of Fiorence Walz if she has 51 % ownersl3ig; howee�er, Ms. Moermond cannot provide legal advice. Ms. Moermond s�g�ested they contact an attomey who specializes in real estate. If Florence Wa1z is indigent, she may be able to be represented by Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services. Mr. Magner stated if no action was taken and the Council approves the resolution to repair or remove, the City would raze the building and assess those costs on the taxes. At that point, the lot could be sold. The adjoining property owner may be interested in the lot. 6�-���-5 LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF NLY 8, 2003 Page 10 Mr. Trudrowski asked whether $3,070 was the total tas bili. Tony Novak responded there aze also penalties. Mr. Magner added that there may be assessments, too. Mr. Trudrowski stated they aze going to be gone July 23. He asked whether this issue could be delayed for that meeting in order for them to talk to an attorney. They would like to raze the property and put up a new structure. Mr. Magner responded if they are considering anything other than rehabilitation, they should check with LIEP about rebuilding on it because it is an extremely sma12 lof. Ms. Moermond stated she is not incIined to ask the Councii to delay this. This is a dangerous situafion. There are moid and structural problems. Children could get inside. Ms. Trudrowski concurred with Ms. Moermond and asked when would be the next meeting. Ms. Moermond responded there is a legislative heazing on July 22. Ms. Trudrowski responded she cannot make that meeting. Mr. Magnez stated that there shouid be enough time in the next two weeks to answer the questions about the legal opportunity to work on the property. Then, Ms. Moermond can make more of an educated decision on the property on July 23. Ms. Trudrowski responded that is fair. Ms. Moermand stated that once the ownership issue is clear, then she ��iIl be looking for a Code Compliance Inspection. When talking to the building official about whether this is a rebuildable site, they should ask if it is a site that can be rehabilitated. Her concern is there is so much of an investment, it may be ireated as a new building. Mr. Trudrowski responded it may need to be tom down and started over. Ms. Moermond suggested the Trudrowskis call her before they go on vacation. Jacob Bellinsky, 1813 Sheridan Avemie, appeared and stated he is the adjoining property owner. The property at 1819 Sheridan is such a small lot, aud a rodent irap right now. Neighbors complain that rabbits are breeding there. He would like to acquire the lamd once it is vacant. (Mr. Bellinsky submitted a photograph.) Mr. Trudrowski asked whether the City sells the property. Mr. Magner explained that his office wouid hire a contractor to remove the dwelling 15 days after the Council approves the order. Ms. A�Ioermond added #hai if �athing else happens, tlae property will forfeit to the State. (Thcre avas futi�ca discvssion about the property.) Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the resolution. � 1004 Bush Avenue (Note: this address was called at the beginning of the meeting, but the owner was not present.) v� c��� LEGISLATIVE HEAP.R�iG MINUTES OF JULY &, 2003 (A videotape was shown.} Page 11 Daniel Yesnes, P.O. Box 5032, Hopkins, appeazed and stated he received a letter from the inspector regarding the debris. He called the inspector to tell him the tenant was moving out. The inspector said his concem was the box spring and the dresser. Ms_ Yesaes went there and took away those things. As faz as he kuew, the garbage service wouId take the resT and tha carts. That was the last he heazd of it until he received a letter about the charges from the City. He does not know if there is a step missing. Mr. Yesnes complied wiih what the inspector told him verbally. Either tfie garbage people did not pick it up or the City did it beforehand. Ms. Moermond asked whai was in the surmnary abatement order. Mr. Magner responded the top box is checked: "garbage, rubbish, discazded furniture, appliances, vehicle parts, scrap wood and metal, recycling materials, household items, building materiats or rubble, tires, brush, etc, from yard areas." Written below is "fiuniture and a enattress." Ms. Moermond asked whether he received a copy of the order. NTr. Yesnes responded he did. The box spring and a clothing dresser were the big things the inspector asked him to take care of. He saw things by the aliey ready to go. The inspector told him to take care of something and he did. As could be seen from the videotape, 90% of the items were in garbage carts. Ms. Moermond asked if there was a record of the phone conversation_ Mr. Rohinson responded that there was not. The summary abatement was mailed on February 4, 2003, with a compliance date of February 10. The work was done by the Pazks Degarhnent on Febrttaty 18. There were 14 days between the time the summary abatement was mailed and the time Parks did the work There was plenty of time for the garbage company to pick it up. Mr. Yesnes respot2ded Yhe tenant gave him a story. The big stuff was taken caze of by Mr. Yesnes and the rest was in carts. Ms. Moermond asked about the recheck and the cleanup. Mr. Robinson responded the recheck was Febresary 10 and the cleanup was February 18. Ms. Moermand asked if there was a probTem with the garbage service. Mr. Yesnes responded the tenants may have cancelled the garbage service. Mr. Yesnes is not certain. He is only saying the big items were taken. The amount of $306 seems high for iterns that are in a cart and ready for a truck to dump. Ms. Moermond asked about ihe hourly charge_ Mr. Robinson responded $225. Mr. Yesnes stated tl�ere were five or sis carts futl of tltis stuff Ms. Moermond responded the City is not in the garbage business. T�ey only send people out on certain calls. The tenants are responsible in the lease, but ultimately it is the owner's responsibility. It was not taken care of. The recourse is not with the City. She cannot make an argument to ihe City Councit that the citizens of Saint Paul are responsible for his tenants cancelling the gazbage service a week eazly. He should seek the money from the tenants for the cost incurred. d�r�� � LEGISLATNE HEARING MINUTES OF JL7LY 8, 2d03 Page 12 Mr. Yesnes asked if the inspector followed standard procedures. Absolutely, responded Ms. Moermond. Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. 422 Jessamine Avenue East (Note: this address was called at the beginning of the meeting, but the owner was not present.) The following appeared: Robe�t H_ De�lorin, owner, and Kathy Schmig, friend. Ms. Schmig stated that Rosev�ary Deflorin (ane of the l'asted owners) is deceased, and Robert is her son. Marcia Moermond stated the assessment is for $1,150. Ms. Schmig asked for a breakdown of the costs. Steve Magner responded the workers were there for three hours for $675, ihere were 25 tires, and ten yazds of refuse. Mr. Deflorin responded he watched them pick it up. The workers were there for one hour, His yard is fenced. One guy went out of the yard and picked up garbage from the church property. Ms. Schmig stated there was a dumpster on March 20 and they paid $270 for it. All the refuse was in that dumpster. Mr. Deflorin stated the City ripped down security cameras and cut the cabies. Ms. Schmid sta#ed there were tires in the tree, and they cut that down. They wexe in the house and watched the workers do ttie entire thing. They were having some problems so they could not come out of t�e ho�se. 'I'he City did not have to teaz down the treehouse. They did not have to take the empty trash barrels. That does not make any sense. There were 11 cazs there. By the time they came, there was one caz left. There was a flatbed tow truck that the workers pushed, and they opened its hood. They took one car out and left the flatbed there. They gave a ticket for pazking on the lawn. He has been doing it for 40 years. There was a dog catcher there, who left a note that the dog were abandoned there_ Then, they cazne and put a vacant building sign on the house on Apri17. By Apri14, they sent the check back on an app�at of the first wark order. Ms. Moermond responded she would like to see the paperwork on thai (Ms. Schmig showed Ms. Moermond a document.) Ms. Schmig stated she got a call on the day of the appeal for T1ze vaaan# building saying that Code Enforcement was going to drop it because it is not vacant any Ionger. After that, they got another noYice tt�at screens were missing, uehicies must be operating, fascia, etc. It was fixed. They feel they are being harassea. The house was condemned in 2000. Now, the house is in good shape. Ms. Schmig does not feel the City should come in every time they want to look at the house. There were trash and cazs there, but they took care of it except frsr one automobile. She would like to see the videotape. (A videotape was shown.) C�3' � LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JIJLY 8, 2003 Page 13 Ms. Schmig stated she does not think it took three hours to do that little bit of work. Also, the yazd was ripped up. Ms. Schsnig stated the City gave them three days to do the first order. She appealed and got more time. They got it all done before the hearing. She thought the wood wouid be okay. As for the fires, Mr. Deflorin is a mechanic. That is her fault; she thought the tires would be okay if they were stacked neatly. Ms. Schmig stated they have trash picked up every week. Ms. Moermond asked faz a� i#amized list of tice charges. Tluee hours at $675, 25 tires at $250, ten cubic yazds at $180, plus the $45 administrative fces comes to a tofai assessment of $1,150, responded Mr. Magner. As for the tires in the tree,lVis. Schmig asked "af lhe City had determines the trees to be rotted. Ms. Moermond responded there is a charge per tire. (Ms. Schmig showed two out of the four cables that she says were ripped or tom by the City.) Mr. Deflorin stated the City shorted out some of the channels on the monitor. He feeis there is a personal ventietta against him. 1�9r. Sch�nig stated Mr. Deflorin got in trouble a few years ago, buY he shoa3d not have tfl pay for the rest of his life. Also, when he went to the building code place to deal with the vacant building, ten cops anested them because Mr. Deflorin had a wazrant. It seems there were things damaged or taken that had useful value, stated Ms. Moermond. They can file a claim with the City. She asked did they want the assessment spread over five years. Ms. Schmig responded yes. Ms. Ricer�ond recommends spreading the assessm�ut over a five-yeaz period The hearing was adjourned at 12:11 p.m. rrn � � � '� � h w U C W F z � m � < �QO 4 G 7 zQ� 4YF �c�a o°� F°� "u� F [z O F {� � C a m ❑ � < � 0 z m E ¢ Q ¢ N 0 ti 6 z N ii .�. O � ! Ti z G b c .. � a v � U � �o N � 0 H � a�. v N � � o � � � " Q � 0 T A, � + "G - � � u" 4 M o � N O E � �'�.+ � L'. 1�1 � � � � £ .o z' � a Z 3 - U Q 3 pp U � T C U a w d m � 4 . a u � m u � u L F � � F r < � U a � � � m 0 �� � Q � 1 N m �� � cj I1� 0 N I N i o I Is �o I .� ; n 0 0 m c u � a �m � a � � R � 'L i '_ o � a z v c c 0 o y u u R C C m R � C C ..a p fn + m O J h' m �� Q o �� n O O o N O E > � O ` •G c , 1 "1 V O O � o O r p ^ `u r E ❑ a � Z c � V 6 9 ,p 5 O -` e c � O $ � u C G � 'o C C � 4 z v� X c�: C a � m 0 U .� 4 Z � ' o ,� :� a �� .3 u�-- � S � � � � � «� � � � Y U 0 � d � � i m � `> t � _ ;; � � � N ; a �, � E '` �. "c � ° 9 W 3 d (y C� � � � W � E E ¢i � ` C7 �n' U c F U z `, , I � � � nf' } a �v ` I � r v � ._ 0 y .. .; c � c. � a u c U " � Q u � ia W W G C � � � a y 9 ` q R O = .� ❑ tl E � `a L a � O u E Z u � a � Z � � �en {� � a � Z `� e 0 W ' > L �_ � � C E c < o u e ` G � v � M � C x �+ F C .� J � �� 1 � � � � � � � � � � ` \ 1 V �� � U�� ` `-' � .� � J � � v