Loading...
04-1126/af�i�r�Dc ����Gh� Council File # ��_' ` Green Sheet # � RESOLUTION OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented By Referred To a` Committee: Date 1 WHEREAS, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has requested the City Council to 2 hold public hearings to consider the advisability and necessity of ordering the repair or wrecking and 3 removal of a two and a half story, wood frame, duplex with an oversized, two-stall, garage located on 4 property hereinafter refened to as the "Subject Property" and commonly known as 801 Sims Avenue. 5 This property is legally described as follows, to wit: Lot 15, and the West 2 1/2 feet of the South 55 feet of the North 85 feet of Lot 16, and the West 2 1/2 feet of the South 40 feet of Lot 16, Block 21, Arlington Hill Addition to Saint Paul 1� ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement on or before August 9, 2004, the following are the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property:Janice M. Timmers, trustee, Edwin A. Timmers, Jr. And Janice M. Timmers Trust Agreement, 5599 Hugo Rd, White Bear Lake, MN 55110-2344 ; Edwin A. Tiznmers, Jr. And Janice M. Timmers, 5599 Hugo Rd, White Bear Lake, MN 55110-2344; Nosratollah Mazhariravesh and Pan S. Yaung, 1444 Sargent Ave, St. Paul, NIN 55105- 2329 14 WHEREAS, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has served in accordance with the 20 provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul I.egislative Code an arder identified as an "Order to Abate 21 Nuisance Building(s)" dated September 20, 2004; and 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 WFIEREAS, this order informed the then known interested or responsible puties that the structure located on the Subject Property is a nuisance bualding(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 5, 2004; and WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolition; and AA-ADA-EEO Employer p�(- Ilalo 1 WHEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Neighborhood Housing & Z Property Tmprovement requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Izgislative 3 Hearing Officer of fhe 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 L.egislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of 7 the public hearings; and 9 WT�REAS, a hearing was held before the I.egislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City 10 Council on Tuesday, November 23, 2004 to heaz testimony and evidence, and after receiving tesfimony ll and evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible 12 parties to make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and 13 welfare and remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in 14 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing 15 the structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of 16 the structure to be completed within F�ff '�° :��} days after the date of the Council Hearing; and 17 f�d� �5 ) 18 WHEREAS, a hearing was held befare the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, December 1, 19 2004 and the testlmony and evidence including the action taken by Che I.egislative Hearing Officer was 20 considered by the Council; now therefore 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 BE TT 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 801 Sims Avenue; 2. Q 5. � That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45. That [he costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is esrimated to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000.00). That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or Building code violarions 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 conected. That Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has posted a placard on the Subject Ptoperty which declares it to be a nuisance condiYion subject to demolirion. That this building has been routinely monitored by Neighborhood Housing & Property Ixnprovement, VacantfNuisance Buildings. That the known interested parties and owners are as previously stated in this resolution and that the notification requirements of Chapter 45 have been fu1fi11ed. AA-ADA-EEO Hmployer o�(- ��a.b 1 ORDER 2 The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order: 3 l. The above referenced interested or responsible parties shall make the Subject Properiy safe and 4 not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and remove its blighting influence 5 on the community by rehabilitating this structure and correcting all deficiencies as prescribed in 6 the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accordance with all applicabie 7 codes and ordinances, or in the altemative by demolishing and removing the structure in 8 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition and 4 removal of the structure must be completed within ��.��'� days after the date of the Council 10 Aearing. /=�Je !S) 11 2. If the above corrective action is not completed within this period of time Neighborhood Housing 12 & Property Improvement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps aze necessary to demolish 13 and remove this structure, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject Property 14 pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul L.egislative Code. 15 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal 16 property or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be 17 removed from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If all 18 personal property is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint 19 Paul shall remove and dispose of such property as provided by law. 20 4. It is further ordered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to the owners and interested parties in ac with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Yeas Navs Absent senanav �/ Mont4omerv �/ Bostrom y mhz Has Lar HeZ Adop Adop By: Appr By: Requested by Department of: AA-ADA-EEO Employzr Nei hborho d Housin Pro ert Im rovement By: � o�i- t ► a� � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � �epartmenUofficelcouncil: Oate 4nitiated: NH — NeighbaLoodHousin�JProperty 29-0CT-04 Green Sheet NO: 3024063 ConWCt Person & Phone: Andy Dawkins 266-1927 Must Be on Council Agenda by 01-DEC-04 � Assign Number For Routing Order 0 e' h rh Ho ' o er c � I rh o' o r � De az[mentD'uec[or � l 5 i Cierk C' C1erk Total # of Signature Pages, (Clip NI Locations for Signature) 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 compiy with the resolution, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement is ordered to remove the building. The subject property is located at 801 Sims Avenue. idations: npprove (n) or F Planning Commission CIB Committee Civil Service Commission 1. Has this person(firm ever worked untler a contract fo� this department? Yes No 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this person/fittn possess a skill not normally possessed by any current city employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separete sheet and attach to green sheet Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why): This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chapter 45 and a vacant 6uilding as defined in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible pazties known [o the Enforcement Officer were given an order to �% repair or remove the building at 801 Sims Avenue by October 2Q 2004, and have failed to comply with those orders. Ativantageslf Approvetl: The City will eliminate a nuisance. � it ° E� � c� ���14 DisadvanWges If Approved: �,a d E �.�4 =°- �..d � d AP � The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to the property, collected as a special assessment against the property taxes. Disadvantages If Not Approvetl: A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will continue to blight the community. ToWI Amount of g000 Transaction: CostlRevenueBUdgeted: y Fundin9 Source: NuisanCe HoUSing Activiri Number: 30251 Financiallntormaiion: Abatement (Explain) Q� z� MII�tUt'ES OF TF� LEGISLATIVE HEARING Oy"��Z,�p ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIl2, CONDEMNATIONS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS, SUMMARY ABATEMENT ORDERS, RENTAL REVOCATION CERTIFICATES Tuesday, November 23, 2004 Room 330 Courthouse Mazeia 1Vloermond, Legisiative Hearing Officer Ttie hearing was caIled to order at 10:07 A.M. STAFF PItESENT: Andy Dawl�s, I3eighborhood Housing and Property Improvemern (1�HPn; Pat Fish, Office of Fire Prevention; 3ean LaClare, NHPI; Steve Magner, NHPI Appeal of s Deficiency list, which includes condemnarion, at 1315 Rice Street. (Laid over from 11-IS-04) (The owner did not appear.) Racquel Naylor said that the owner was at the last hearing and said he would be unable to attend this hearing. Pat Fish explained that the owner and his attorney were there on November 16 at the followup inspection There was only one garage space she didn't get into. A tenant changed a lock on one unit. Marcia Moermond asked was there a change in the condition that led to the condemnation Ms. Fish responded little work was done, and his attorney agreed to that. The basement azea was occupied as a band practice room. It looked lilce people had been sleeping there. The walls were lined with cardboard, which is dangerous. That was added to the list. There is not sufficient e�ting from the basement, fire separation, lighting. It is not set up to be occupied; it is only set up to be used for storage. He w�71 have to vacate that space. There aze three tenants in the building, and Community Stab�ization will keep them in their place until later. The attomey said he was hu�ed to assist in selling the build'mg, said Ms. Fish. The vacate date was extended to November 29. In the mearatime, the other spaces aze vacant with exception of the basement. Ms. Moermond recommends denying the appeal on the Deficiency List dated November 3, 2004. This will go for public hearing before the City Council on December 1. Discussion on resolution to remove or repair the property at 1956 Feronia Avenue. Ms. Moermond stated she has a letter indicating they are ready to get their pernuts. She would 1�7ce to start out with the plans, proof of ability to finance the plans, and the performance bond. Mark Balay, Marcus Balay Architects, appeared and stated he has plans. There was a preliminary meeting in LIEP, but they have not seen the plans. The plans have been reviewed with Councilmember Benanav. Mr. Balay is developing each of these sheets more each day. He just came from the building where they were verifying window sizes for window replacement today. They aze down to setting up contracts for the costs. 1'he last set ofplans had a great design, but � � i a� MINUTES OF TI� LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF NOVEMBER 23, 2004 Page 2 they were not able to do it when the cost came m. This current solurion will work based on the amount of money they approved Ms. Moermond stated the mspectors w"sll need to review these plans. The plan review process can be cumbersome and tune intensive. Sfie is concerned this is gomg to be bogged down and throw off time schedules. Ms. Brown responded that two people from LIEP have been at the m�am �cn ivtr. s�y. Mr. Balay stated the work is happenmg mside the bwld'mg. From a wning standpomt, LIEP has indicated this is a mmor issue, but he needs to douhle check t1�at because he talked to them two months ago. Ms. Moermond asked about the financing. Ms. Brown responded she bought the entu�e packet with her, as she was not sure what Ms. Moermond would want. Ms. Moermond responded that Counc�nember Benanav has reviewed these m detaz'i. He has done reat estate finance, so she will tn�st his judgement on tt�at. They aze okay. Ms. Brown stated she never received an answer to her letter. Ms. Moermond responded each of them is looidng for assurances from the other. The owner wi71 not get the permit to rehab�litate this bwld'mg uniess the City Counc�7 has passed a reso}urion to give pernvssion to rehab it. She will not get permission uatil she posts this substantiai bond because of the past failure. The $25,OQ0 needs to be posted. TSey can work on the tunmg so it can be tuned as close as possble to when they seek the permits from L1EP. She cannot recommend to the Coimc� that they adopt tivs resolurion without postmg the bond. The bond is refundable upon complerion of the project. The code is clear on tt�at. The Council could write m the resolution the conditions on when the bond can be refuuded Build'mg inspectors m LIEP have discretion to grant another 180 days if the project is 50% complete at the 180-days mazk. If they had to scrap the project and demolish the build'mg, the owner can get tUe money back. The purpose of the bond is to make sure the project is completed Everything they talked about mdicated the project can be done m one year. Mr. Magner stated if the property is removed witl�um 180 days, the bond is refunded. Mr. Balay stated they are creatin� two targets: one that is successful if they put the build'mg m service and the other is i#'they want to remove the b"'id*'r�o, This is acceptabie to him. Ms. Browu added that this takes case of the feazs on both sides. Ms. Moermond stated she would li7ce to pick a time certam when they go before the Counc�7. She does not want the bw7ding to be delayed. The letter mentioned the first week ofDecember they would seek permits. Mr. Ba1ay responded 2 to 3 weeks to get review. He asked does he need tentarive approval and permits ready to be picked up before he goes to Counc�7. Ms. Moermond resgonded yes. She is thmldng that they should go to LIEP as soon as they can. Mr. Magner stated the plans examiner 7im B3oom needs to be worked with. He will brmg in the City's structural engmeer. When the plans exammer gives the okay, then the owner can be contacted, the resolution can be written, the owner w�71 need to post a bond, and then the matter w�71 go to Counc�7. �-� ra� MII�tt3TES OF TI� LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF NOVEMBER 23, 2004 Page 3 Ms. Moermond stated she is thinkmg about December 22 to bring it to Counc�7. Mr. Balay and Ms. Brown responded that is acc$ptable. Ms. Moermond recontmends granting 1$0 days to rehab�7itate the property on condition that a $25,000 bond is posted by noon of December 22. She w�l assume everythmg else in the permit process �s workmg. Resolutton ordering the owner to mmove or repair the property at 475 Beaumont Avenue. If the owner fails to camply with the resolution, Neighborhood Housiag and Property Improvement is ordered to remove the building. (No photographs were submitted at this time.) Steve Magner gave the following report: The building is a two-story wood frame single family dwellmg with an attached single caz gazage. The building has been vacant since March 31, 2004. The current owners are Xy Moua Vang and Tay Vang. There have been four suuvnary abatement notices to remove refuse, secure gazage, cut tall grass, secure window and garage door. On September 8, 2004, an inspeciion 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 September 20, 2004 with a compliance date of October 20. As of this date, the properiy remains in a condition which comprises a miisance as defined by the legislative code. T'he City has had to board this building to secure it against trespass. The vacant building registrarion fees are due. Tasation has placed an estimated market value of $24,5Q0 on the land and $98,OQ0 on the building. As of November 9, no one has applied for a Code Compliance Inspection nor has a bond been posted The estimated cost to repair this stnxchue is $50,000 to $60,000; estisnated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000. Tay Vang, owner, 133 Magnolia Avenue East, one of the fee-owners, appeared and stated he is working with the mortgage company to sell the property. He started to repaa it, but ran out of money. A lot of damage occuned and he had to move out. He put a new roof on the praperty, He purchased all the windows and tl�ey are inside. Ms. Moermond asked how close he is to selling. Mr. Vang responded it has been going on for three weeks. They have to work through an attorney. The lien holder is City Mortgage. It is close to foreclosure. He had been making payments for a yeaz, but he does not have money to make the payments any more. Ms. Moermond asked about the summuy abatement notices. Mr. Magner responded the first was issued on March 31, 2004. The Summary abatement for the grass was abated. Ms. Moermond stated this does not look promising. Tlie City has had to manage the property, secure it, and do the same with the window. Mr. Vang responded he put all the boards on all the windows. Ms. Moermond stated all of these thuigs indicate that the owner does not know how to get the property rehabbed. She does not heaz there is an imminent sale. There are a couple of steps he MINUTES OF TI� LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF NOVEMBER 23, 2004 � �-�Z-b O�i-�CZb Page 4 can take: i) Get a code coix�liance mspection, 2) Pay the vacant bufld'mg fees. The City requaes a code compliance mspectioa She needs to get from the owner a concrete signal that he lmows whai he is doing. One signal is the code compliance inspection. Mr. Magner stated he ne�s a code compliance inspection, which can be used 'm fieu of the truth-in-seIl of housmg, to seIl the PTOPertY Ms. Moermond recommends laymg over to the December 14 Legislative hearmg �'the following is done by noon of December i: 1) get a code compliance mspection, 2) get the vacant bwlding fees. y Resodufion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at SUl Sims Avenue. If the ""y` owner fails to comply with the resolution, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement is ordered to remove the buildisg. (Steve Magner submitted photographs.) Steve Magner gave the followmg staffreport: tivs is a two and a half story duplex with a detached two stall gazage. The buiiding was condemned in September 2004 and has been vacant since Juty 12, 2004. The current owner is listed as Edwin A. Timmers and Janice M. Timmers. Ms. Timmers sent a letter that she has been paid offon her contract-for-deed and no longer has interest in the property. Mr. Magner has been contacted by Nosratollah Mazhariravesh and he plans to sell the property to a group who w�71 do redevelopment on the property. Mr. Magner stated there have been two summary abatement notices issued to remove debris and remove inoperable truck and van lacking current tabs or license. On September 15, 2004, an inspection of the bu�lding 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 September 20, 2004, with a compliance date of October 5. As of this date, th'ss property remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The City has had to board this bu�lding to secure it against trespass. The vacant building fees aze due. TaYation has piaced an estimated market value of $33,800 on Yhe ]and and $134,400 on the building. As of November 9, a code compliance inspection has not been applied for and the $2,000 bond has not been posted. Code Enforcement offices estimated the cost to repair is $100,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $$,000. The structure is marginally salvageable. It is a dangerous nuisance. The fire was on 7uty 11. Nosratollah Mazhariravesh appeazed and stated he is the owner, and he sold it to Gloria Murphy, who wants to develop it for another building. They need more time because they wam to demolish the other rivo buildings altogether. He would lilce another 2 to 3 months to demolish the comer. Gloria Murphy, Makayley Foundation, appeared and stated they put a purchase agreement on the property on Fn_day. They would like to do workforce property with a bakery. They have talked to University Bank and they have an investor. Ms. Moermond stated she is not inclined to grant an extension in this case. The photographs are compelling. This is a blight on the neighborhood. She asked does Ms. Murphy laiow from ------ ,���._.�___.–}..�._�.� _ .n____ -.-._ ___—_ ,-------- - 0� -i l�� MINUTES OF Tf� I.EGISLATIVE HEARING OF NOVEMBER 23, 2004 Page 5 experience that it is cheaper to demolish three houses together than to demolish them mdividually. Ms. Murphy responded no, but the property manager has the e:cperience to know tfiis. Slae put together the preliminary fmancial 'mformation on it. Ms. Mnermond stated she w71 give them unt�l December i to decide what they want to do. Mr Mwphy needs to decide if she wants to demolish it or atlow the City to do ik. Mr. Magner eatplamed how issues in the bu�d'mg-such as aesbestos-�an increase the amount of the bid The City can do the demolition, and the cost would be assessed to the taxes. Also, his office would work with the project manager for preparmg the site after the demolition Ms. Moermond ta7ked about the property tax abatement program when a bwld'mg experieaces a disaster. The owner would not have to pay taxes on sometiung that does not esist anymore. (Ms. Moermond's recommendation is forthcoming.) Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 195 White Bear Avenue North. Jean LeClare, NHPI, appeazed and stated she received a complaint about a tree or bush. On the inspection, they found a shrub hanging over the public sidewalk. An order was issued William ShelYOn, owner, appeazed and stated this is a tree-sized bush It adds value to the properiy and looks nice on [he corner. C�tting the branch would remove the problem, but it may harm the look. He wants to hire a musery or professional gardener to prune the tree back. It was not a problem for the previous owner who built the house. He plans to correct the probiem, and he understands why someone would want the limbs removed (Ms. LeClare showed two photographs to Ms. Moermond. One photograph was returned.) Ms. Moermond asked what heighi is the protusion. Ms. LeClaze responded 5 to 6 feet. The previous owner was issued orders in 2001. When it was reinspected, it was in compliance. Ms. Moeimand stated it has been about 7 to 8 weeks since he received the order. She asked has he talked to a tree e�ert. Mr. Shelton responded someone in Home Depot is going to come out. He called another nursery, but they want a fee to come out. Ms. Moermond recommends denying the appeal and changing the compliance date to December 22, 20�4 on the Suuunary Abatement Order dated October 26, 2004. It does need to be fixed. Appeal of Excessive Consumption Letter at 582 Charles Avenae. The following appeared: Pat Lindgren, owner, and Chris Crutchfield Andy Dawkins reported inspector Seeley made the call of excessive storage m the exterior. There was gazbage and debris that needed to be taken caze o£ He got the appeal that Ms. Lindgren had filed and realized she let the time expire to appeal the original Conection Notice. It caught her attention when she got an excessive consumption �ill for $50 for not taking care ofthe excessive t7 1��, 1��IINUTES OF TFIE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF NOVEMBER 23, 2004 Page 6 storage. Now, she is domg an agpeat on both. Mr. Dawlaus told Ms. L'mdgren thai the excessive consumption appeal process is separate and needs to be appealed at another time. Ms. Moermond asked to see a copy of the origmal Correction Norice. (Mr. Dawlm�s and Mr. Crutchfield both showed Ms. Moermond thea copy of the norice.) Mr. Dawkms stated the owner did not make a timely appeal of the originat Correction Notice and she va� contumue to get excessive consumprion bills if NFiPI says that she needs to do something. He offered to mediate it, bring Inspec,�tor Seeley witfi hnn, and see if they can do some of what Ms. Seeley is requestmg and not others. If the meantime, Mr. Dawkins w�i not be sending any excessive consumption bills an this property until they get m fro� of Ms. Moermond on the orign�al excessive consumprion b�l. Mr. Crutchfield asked where tbat leaves the $50 on the original excessive consumption notice. The awner feels she has compfied with this order. She wazrts to work with Mr. Dawkins, but does not feet she should be penalized $50 for hyu�g to comply. Mr. Crutchfield asked that they corninue with this process and go with his tecommendation and ask that Ms. Moermond waive the $50 fee. Ms. Lindgren stated she started a construction project in 2002. The construction project ripped her garden and put it in the back. She has beeu workmg on this for two yeazs. She has not had time to put the garden back and she has a pile of wood The wood is 1f3 of the size it was the last time she was here. New wood has been added. She did some work on the back door. She needs to put trim sround the patio door in the basement. Those items are not trash They aze items she bas purchased arnd 'mtends to use for something. Ms. Moermoned stated TTf�IPI can cancei the bill in the depaztment. If there is an assessment for excessive consumption, the owner can apgeal that. Ms. Moermond will delete it. The owner should work with NHPi. If the items are usefui, they need to be properly stored in a shed or garage. The Neighborhood Nuisance Handbook tallcs about stormg thuigs. They cannot be laying around Ms. Moermond recommends denymg the appeal on the Excessive Consumption Invoice dated November 4, 2004 Appeal of Notice of Condemnation and Order Yo Vacate at 780 Capitol Heights. The following appeazed: Elizabeth Speaker, owner; Betty Berger, attorney. Steve Magner reported he there ate two principal violations that constitute the condetnnarion and need to be brought into compliance in order to vacate. That would be the reason they are here today. Betty Berger stated she wanted to talk about the sewer first. The plumbing and water works. There was a letter dated April 2, 2003, where they did a fog test. Then, they required Ms. Speaker to hire someone to do a videotape. The videotape showed there was no obvious break in �� ► ��h MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEAItING OF NOVEMBER 23, 2004 Page 7 the sewer service. Ms. Speaker has talked to the sewer coinpany. The City tbinks there is a sewer problem, but the City cannot document there is a break m the sewer line. There is �other order for trash back m October thai does not mention the sewer. (Ms. Berger gave Ms. Moeimond some paperwork.) Ms. Moermond stated there are two issues i) break in the sewer l�e, 2) rodent mfestation She is tal�g the inspector's word that on November 10, there was evidence when the uispector was there. The extern�mator says as of 3ast weekend, the simation is cleaned up. Ms. Berger responded she looked at the file m Mr. Dawkins' Office and there was nothaig m the file that said the City saw rats or rodents. Ms. Moernaond asked does she live there. Ms. Speaker responded she lives with three sons and a ten year old grandson. She is retaed and 6�. Her older son hetps out a lot. The grandchild lives with her full time. Ms. Moermond took a recess to go over the sewer records. (Recess from 11:28 to 11:32 am.) Ms. Moermond stated that in her review of the materials, the tape was inconclusive. They found an uregularity m the pipe, and she is looking at a problem with the way the pipe comes toward the property. They recommend the owner get a contractor to look at tivs. As for the Animal Control finding, they perfoxmed a smoke test and found it to be positive. Ivls. Berger responded the letter says they do not msure the service was broken. It is inconclusive. Ms. Moermond responded the smoke test was positive. Ms. Berger stated Ryan Phunbing has come out to give an estimate. They have gotten the papers to do the work. The ptumbmg does work m her house. The toilets flush. It is not a health and safety hazard 14Is. Maermond responded unless it is flushing mto the so�7 azound her house and there is a leak. Ms. Berger responded there is no proof of that. The owner is in the process of dealin$ with her financial cnmch Someone from Homestead Mortgage visited November 15, and there was no evidence of odor or rodenta There aze cosmetic problems. There aze complamts about the windows. He has pictures of them. Ms. Moermond stated they should deal witfi the prmcipal violations here. She asked wl�at led the inspector to find the rodevt infestatioa Mr. Magner responded that Lisa Martin, the mspector, asked aze thea holes in the yard 'm correspoudence to where the sewer lme runs, and the answer was yes. The letter mdicated a positive fog test was found Before the advent of cameras, this is how the City found a leak iu the system. Ninety-nme percent of the tune when there was a positive fog test, there was a break or a irregularity m the sewer lme when it was dug up. A1so, there were rodent holes. The neighbors say there are rodents commg out of these holes. Also, there aze two lazge dogs on the propercy. There is a lot of waste projecY that rodents go after as a so�ce of food. ��-t� �� MIlVUTES OF TIiE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF NOVEMBBR 23, 2004 Page $ Ms. Moermond asked have the sewers been baited. Mr. Magner resQonded they bait the sewers when they do this. But, whea they kffi these rodents, new rodents take thea place. ThaY is why they secure the system. It is supposed to be a sealed system. Ms. Berger stateti Mr. Magner's answer is they have not seen the rats. Mr. Magner responded that is not his answer. The inspector noted there aze rat holes, there are conversations with adjacent property owners, they 2�ave baited the sewers, and they st�71 suspect there is some 'sregularity or trreak m the sewer line. Ms. Berger stated the cliern agrees the sewer line should be mvestigated. That is not the issue. The question is the condemnation for heahh and safety. They aze in the process of identifymg the problem Everyone has had a rat problem. That is not a reason to condemn the properiy. An extermmator says there aze no rats out there. Sharon Nichols, 30 Cottage West, appeazed and stated she is Ms. Speaker's sister. She got free money or payback money from Distciet 7. Ttiey were supposed to fix up the properiy. They started, and then walked off the job. Ms. Nicho]s called District 7 and said that Ms. Speaker was getting evicted. Ms. Nichols called Ms. Martm and never got a call back. She tallced to Mr. Magner at length. I3istrict 7 fiYed the wmdows and they ttever finished it. They never paid tbat money back New houses were buiit in the area. The rats could have come when they tore up that property. Joe Levasseur stated they did not t�ave the money to get it fixed. A neighbor next door bas been there six months and has been calling and complainmg. He has big flood lights up because someone shot the windows aut of his Jeep. It has been hard to find work, He would be happy to fix the plce up if they had the money. They say there is $10,000 grant if she stays in the property, but they said it is not aua7able until7anuary 1. If that's the case, they should not be harassing her now. They give her money to fuc the house up, they take offwith the job half done, and the inspectors say the properiy is fine. Two days later, the dog pound was called because they bark when people walk by. Then, they have a vacate sign on the house. Two days eazlier, the mspectors were there. They came by one day and said everything was fine and then two days later they said the premises is condemned JeffLevasseur, 26 i Beividere Street, appeared and stated that Mrs. Speaker has been there for 40 yeazs and has raised five Idds. He tries to fix anythmg with the house. They will try to work on the garage. They need a lot of tune. Without aid, they will have a tough tixne �g anythmg until summer comes. The neighbors love her. There are no complamts except &om the guy next door. Mrs. Speakez lives with his brothers. He is che oldest and he takes care of thmgs. He taught school and he's retffed Tait DanieLson, District 7 Pianning Couneil, 689 I3ale Street Nortb, appeared and stated District 7 Planning Council does not give loans and never has. Mr. DanieLson has witnessed the rats in that neighborhood There seems to be evidence of a break m the sewer ]sne. There aze rats in the neighborhaod of Como and Capitoi Heights. If there is a break m the sewer ]me, they wouid l�lce it fixed quickly. C�-(i�� MINt3TES OF TI� LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF NOVEMBER 23, 2004 Page 9 Ms. Moermond asked is Mr. Magner awaze of any financmg programs. Mr. Magner responded the City can hire a contractor, and the cost would be assessed onto tfie tasces. Tlvs was cleariy mdicated in the letters from tlie sewer division to the owner. This started over a year ago. They received thea last 3etter on 7uly 29. The City would lilce to see this issue taken care of this construction season. Under Chapter 34, not l�avmg a positive coanection to the sewer system is groimds for condemnation. NHPI acted witl�m their powers to issue the order to vacate. They dn not want to see someone put out on the street. They I�ave to be respons�ble to the constituents as requaed by their mission statemecrt. JeffLevasseur stated the Ms. Speaker would 1�7ce it to be taken care of and put on the tasses. Ms. Berger concurred and said Ms. Speaker bas the paperwork for the City to do this work. Ms. Moermond recommends denying the appeal and uphold'mg Order to Vacate dated November 10, 2004. She needs to find c quickly they can move on tivs issue. She is comfortable givmg 1 property. Ttie owner should file the appfication with them In < City can assist. The property tax assessmeat can be arranged o� peopie saying there are rats, and there are rat holes m the prope back to 2003 about rat holes along the sewer ]'me. The inspecta find'mg. She will give the owner one week and then she will exF sewer repaired. She would h'Ice to see progress--answers, paper Works by December 1. She would 1�1�e a date from Public Wot Kodak ds digilalscience° � Appeal of Notice of Condemnation and Order to Vacate at 890 York Avenue. Steve Magner reported that iris office received a complaint. Inspector Martin had a conversation with the first floor tenant. The tenant does not have heat in the property. He normally addresses this hy sending a Correction Notice to the owner. T'he owners are ]isted as David R Beaudet and Steve R. 7ohnson. Mr. Magner was informed by Mr. Johnson that both owners are not in possession of the property. They asked a number of times to get the mailing address for the new owner. In the meantime, there was someone m the &rst and second floor. They issued a condemnation and a vacate as of Monday. He l�as information that legal aide is trying to do a tenants remedies action and wern to court yesterday, but they had not notified this new owner. A Derek Scott is the new owner and has a Blaine address. They tried to contact him and were uaable to find a verifiabie number through 411 and the Internet. Mr. Magner saw a letter to the tenants that the property was sold to Derek Scott and Bob Keiland. Mr. Magner called a phone number and they did not lmow Mr. Scott, hut irnew Mr. Keiland no longer worked there. They gave Mr. Magner a phone number. Mr. Magner called Mr. 5cott and left a phone number. Heat is a basic facility. It is gettmg cold outside. The tenant is getting heat from some other means. Mr. Magner had a conversation ex parte in the hall with the attorney. NHPI is opposed to removing the condemnation, but they are not opposed to extending the vacate date provided the tenant remedy action is taken against Derek Scott, Mr. Scott makes the repairs, or a conservator makes the repairs. Also, the tenant should use some sort of alternative heating in the meantime. The gas stove should not be left on overnight and should not be used for the primary heating system. ff she is boiling water or using it to do something to maintain heat, she shouid have the c�-� �a� MINUTES OF 1T� LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF NOVEMBER 23, 2004 Page 10 window open. If it is electric, the oven should be shut. If it is an electric heater, it should not be P2ugged 'ni tt�rough an extension cord , Perry deStefano, Southern Mmnesota Regional Legal Services, 166 Pourth Street East, #200, reported he has this before the cotat yesterday. Derek Scott is the owner and the other mdividual is a management company. It w�ll take Mr. DeStefimno time because he needs to renotice this. The courthouse is closed l�iovember 25 and 26. He is at the maxmnun of his capacity. He is confident he can have an emergency tenant remedy action aY 1:30 on Monday, December 6. How Typically, an admmistrator can be aQpointed, He is confident he can take care of this because he has done it before. Because af We holiday coming up, he cannot get before a judge before December 6. The tenant's mother 2�as space heaters. He would ]�1ce an opporhmity to cancel the vacate order. Ms. Moermond asked is there water. Mr. DeStefano responded there is a ttseat of a water shut o� if tbaY can be delayed unt7 December 1. There it a law that he can write the new owner and take it out. Mr. Magner asked could someone else process this the followmg week. He does not lmow if the weather will go below zero. They w�71 not be abk to keep the heat in t�at dwellmg at 68 degrees measured five feet from an interior wall. The tenant may do something that is not recommended The potential for fffe and carbon mono�de poisoning is greatiy enhanced. He looked at the weather farecast, and they are not saying big changes from what they are bavmg now. If the weather stays the sazne, it is not an issue, but he wants to go record saying tliat his office is uncomfortable gomg out that far. Mr. Magner wonders if there is someone else m his office that can file the paperwork, Mr. DeStefano responded he does this m conjunction with the City. He tried to get the Ciry to file one with hun. They did not want him to. Mr. Magner asked is tivs a staffing thing, Mr, DeStefano responded that he has about 60 ofthese issues. Mr. Magner stated he would hlce to one mmute to have a com�ersation. (Recess from 12:12 to 12:13} Mr. Magner stated he had a comrersation with the Daector. Ae wouid ]flce to two thmgs: 1) he will contact the City Attorney to see if they can do tbis. Aopefully he can make that call this afternoon and have an answer to Mr. DeStefiaao by 3:OQ. If the weather stays the way it is, his o$ice does not have an issue. If the weather ct�anges, he woutd hlce to rescind the hold on the vacate. The tenant w�71 have to look at gomg to a shelter or a hoteL Mr. DeStefano responded that he is booked, but has openings 4:00 today and 4:00 tomorrow. Mr. DeStefano stated if it gets cold, there is another supervismg attorney that lmows how to do thase. They can have contact with hun and maybe he can file it. He tried that route and he does not have tune either. Ms. Moermond stated she will eatend the date to December 7, but ifthe temperature drops below zero, then the ori�inai vacate date becomes effective. 0� ► ��� MII3UTES OF TI� LEGISLATIVE HEAR.ING OF NOVEIvFBER 23, 2004 Page 11 Mr. DeStefazm asked what would happen if he has court papers by December 6. Ms. Moermond responded she would extend the vacate daie. T'he condemnation may be lifted at that time. Mr. DeStefano asked could he give her the court papers dffectly. Ms. Moermond responded that would be nice. Ms. Moermond cautioned the owner to appropriaYely use space heaters. She has seen homes blow up m these lands of situaiions. She urged the tenant ta be careful when usiug stoves and space heaters. Mr. DeStefano responded tbat he knows he can take care of this. It is just the tim�g that is a problem. (Ms. Moermond's recommendation is forthcoming.) Appeal of Notice to Revoke the Registration Certificate at 478 Thomas Avenue. (No one appeared to represent the property.) Ms. Moermond recommends denying the appeal on the notice dated November 19, 2004. The hearing was adjourned at 12:22 p.m �7