Loading...
04-117��s-r�.�,�� - � , h% aov� RESOLUTION CITY OF SA1NT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented By Referred To 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-story, wood frame, duplex with a detached, two-stall, wood frame and concrete block 4 garage located on property hereinafter referred to as the "Subj ect Properiy" and commonly known as 930 5 Duchess Street. This properiy is legally described as follows, to wit: 6 Lot 51, Block 2, Auditor's Subdivision No. 7 St. Paul Minn 9 WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information 10 obtained by Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement on or before July 23, 2003, the following are 11 the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: David R. Johnson, 12 478 Cleveland Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55105-1327; Gary Torgerson, 14262 - 10 Street. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 Stillwater, MN 55082 WHEREAS, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has served in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislarive Code an order identified as an "Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s)" dated November 18, 2003; and WHEREAS, this order informed the then known 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 struchue located on the Subject Property by December 18, 2003; 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 WH$REAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement 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 haue 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 � �15 Council File # � -�� Green Sheet # ✓DD /��� AA-ADA-EEO Employer o���� 1 WFIEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City 2 Council on Tuesday, January 27, 2004 to hear testimony and evidence, and after receiving tesrimony and 3 evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible parties to 4 make the Subject Properiy safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfaze and 5 remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all 6 applicabie codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in 7 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition of the structure to be 8 completed within��ee�� �� days after the date of the Council Hearing; and 9 /�l1 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 50 WFIEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, February 4, 2004 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the L,egislative 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 930 Duchess Street: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45. That the costs of demolition and removal of this building(s) is estimated to exceed three thousand dollars ($3,000.00). That there now exists and has existed multiple Housing or Building code violations at the Subject Property. That an Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) was sent to the then lrnown responsible parties to correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been corrected. That Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has posted a placard on the Subject Properiy which declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition. That tl�is building has been routinely monitored by Neighborhood Housing & Property Ixnprovement, Vacant/Nuisance 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 fulfilled. ORDER The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order: 1. The above referenced interested or responsible parties shall make the Subj ect Properiy safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare 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 altemative by demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition and removal of the structure must be completed within f�*A�^ ��Tdays after the date of the Council Hearing. /�� AA-ADA-EBO Employer ��ii� 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 2. If the above conective action is not completed within this period of time Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to demolish and remove this structure, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the 5aint Paul L,egislative Code. 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal property or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this rime period. If all personal property is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shall remove and dispose of such properry as provided by law. 4. It is fiuther ordered, that a copy of this resolurion be mailed to the owners and interested parties in accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. Requested by Department of: Benanav Mon tcromerV Bostrom Thune Har Lan xel Adop Adop By: Appr By: Yeas Navs v � ✓ Absent Nei hborhoo Housin Pro ert Im rovement � �i���S� By: � �i Form Approved by City Attorney AA-ADA-EEO Employer � Green cs �;,�� s�;�a Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � l/�//7 Contact Person & Phone: Andy Dawltins 266-1927 Must Be on Councii qgenda by (Date): 04-FEB-04 a2.,�-04 ! Green Sheet NO: 3009735 � oenartment �enc�o rerson 0 � Assign 1 ('"fizeu Services � Deoartmen[ Director Num6er 2 - h• Attomev For ; avo 's ffice bia oN sistant Routing Order 4 :c' cii 5 iN C�erk ! CN Clerk Total # of Signature Pages ` (Clip All Locations for Signature) Action Requested: City Council to pass this resolurion wluch will order the owne(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement is ordered to remove the building. The subject property is located 930 Duchess Street. Recommendations: Approve (A) or Pla�niag Commission CIB Committee Civil Service Commission Must MSwer Llte hoilOWing (1ue5tlon5: 1. Has this person/f�rm ever worked under a contract for this departmenY? Yes No 2. Has this perso�rm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Dces this persontfirm possess a skiff not nonnalry possessed by a�ry current city employee? � Yes No Explain ail yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet Initiatin9 Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, Wben, Where, Why): This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chapter 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paul Legislarive Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties Imown to the Enforcement Officer were given an order to repair or iemove the buIlding at 430 Duchess Street by Decembec 18, 2003, and have failed to comply with those oxdeis. Advantages If Approved: The City will eliminate a nuisance. DisadvaMageslfApproved: The Ciry will spend funds to wreck and remove this bulding(s). These costs will be assessed to the property, collected as a special assessment against the property taxes. I Disadvantages If Not Approved: ' � A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will continue to blight the co�nity. I I Tofal Aa�atint of Trm�on: �� ��ev�ueBfafgeted: Y Pssaainp sosscce: Nuis�ce i �st�Ir �canbec_ 3QZSi �� �� g Financia( I�formation: q Rbatement � � ( (Euptain) J�1� 0 � G���i � `;� Oh/-/r� REPORT Date: January 27, 2004 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Room 330 City Hall 15 West Kellogg Boulevard LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAII2, CONDEMNATIONS, AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS Marcia Moermond Legislative Hearing Officer 1. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 690 Burr Street. If the owaer fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends approval. � 2. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 930 Duchess Street. If the owner fails to compiy with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends granting 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the proper[y on the condition that the following is done by noon of February 4, 2004: 1) the building is entirely secured; 2) the windows are completely boarded with %z inch plywood; 3) the foundation is completely protected from entry; and 4) the sidewalk area is free from trip/fal] hazards by use of fencing as appropriate. 3. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 598 Western Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends granting 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the property on the condition that a bond has been posted by noon of February 4, 2004. 4. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order dated January 14, 2004, at 899 Palace Avenue. Legislative Hearing O�cer recommends denying the appeal. 5. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order dated January 6, 2004, at 930 Duchess Street. Legisiative Hearing O�cer recommends denying the appeal and granting an extension to February 6, 2004. 6. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order dated January 16, 2004, at 930 Duchess Street. Legislative Hearing Officer recommends denying the appeal and granting an extension to February 6, 2Q04. jab �1' .. CTTY OF SAINT PAUL Randy C. Ke/ly, Mayar January 2, 2004 DNISION OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT oL� //7 Andy Dawkins, Program M¢n¢ger Nuisance Bui[ding Code Enjorcement 1600NonhWhiteBearAvenue Tel: 65I-26b7900 SaintPaul, � 55l06 F¢s: 651-266-1926 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement , V acantlNuisance Buiidings Enforcement Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution ordering the repair or removal of the nuisance building(s) located at: 930 Duchess Street The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows: Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, January 27, 2004 City Council Hearing - Wednesday, February 4, 2004 The owners and responsible parties of record are: Name and Last Known Address David R. Johnson 478 Cieveland Avenue St. Paul, MN 55105-1327 Gary Torgerson 14262 -10�` Street Stillwater, MN 55082 . - - . - . .�. .. � . ,�� . .. - Interest Fee Owner Interested Party Lot51, $lack2, Anr�tn�s S�bdivisian Na 7 SL Paul M�n Neighborhood Housing & Properiy 3mprovement has declared f.his building(s) to constitute a "nuisance" as defined by Legisfative Code, Chapter 45. Neighborhood Housing & Progerty Improvement has issued an order to the then laiown responsible parties to eliminate this nuisance condition by correcting the fleficiencies or by razing and removing this building(s). AA-ADA-EEO Employa ��ii� 930 Duchess Street January 2, 2004 Page 2 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 Neighborhood Housing & Properly Improvement that the City Council pass a resolution ordering the responsible parties to either repau, or demolish and remove this building in a timely manner, and failing that, authorize the Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement to proceed to demolition and removal, and to assess the costs incuned against the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the satne manner as tases. Sincerely, 1> /i i Steve Magner Vacant Buildings Supervisor Neighborhood Housing & Properiy Improvement SM:ml ca Frank Berg, Building Inspection and Design Meghan Riley, City Attomeys Office MaryErickson, Assistant Secretary to the Council Laurie Kaplan, PED-Housing Division ccnph AP. ADA-EEO Employer ���. DNISION OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCE�tENT �/� Andy Daukins, Frog�¢m hlannger �, �r s V r PA V L, 1�«isante Building Code Enjorcemersi Ra+uly C. Kelly, Hlayor 1600 Nor[h FVhite Bear Avenue Te[: 65l-166-1900 Sairtt Paul, MN 5�706 F¢z: 651-266-1926 January 2, 2004 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS To all Known Responsible and/or Interested Parties Dear Sir or Madam: The Saint Paul City Council and the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City Council have scheduled public hearings to consider a Council Resolution ordering the repair or removal of the building(s) located at 930 Duchess 5treet. In accordance with the provisions of the Saint Paul Legislative Code Chapter 45, all owners of record and other interested parties with a laiow� interest in this building(s) are hereby notified of these hearings. At these hearings testimony will be heard from the Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement Enforcement Officer and any other parties who wish to be heard. The Council will adopt a resolution describing what action, if any, the Council deems appropriate. Please be advised the Public Hearing before the Legislative Hearing Officer is scheduled for: Tuesday, January 27, 2004, at 10:00 a.m. in Room 330, City Hall, 15 West Kellogg Boulevard; Saint Paul, MN 55106 The Legislative Hearing Offacer will hear the evidence and make a recommendation for action to the full City Council: Wednesday, February 4, 2004, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 3rd Floor, City Ha11,15 West Kellogg Boulevard, Saint Paul, MN 55106. All costs incurred by the City, including inspection costs, administrative costs, title searches, filing fees and, if necessary, demolition and removal expenses, will be assessed against the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as real estate taxes. If you have any questions conceming this matter please call the Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Code Enforcement Officer Steve Maaner at (651)266-1928, or you may leave a voice mail message. Sincerely, �� � .� Steve Maoner V"acant Buildin�s Supervisor Nei,,ahborhood Housing & Property Tmprovement SM:mI A4-ADA-EEO Employn �'�- ��`� LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JANUARY 27, 2004 Page 4 transaction with Ms. Cox, and are in the process of cleaning out the building. Mr. Magner suspects that they aze looking for 180 days to bring the properiy into compiiance. Ms. Moermond asked if they had a purchase agreement for the properry. Ms. Athias responded that they have purchased the property. Ms. Moermond reviewed the photographs that were taken at the time of inspection in July 2003. Ms. Athias explained that everything has been removed from the building, a$2,000 bond will be posted today, and they are ready to begin the rehabilitation. Ms. Moermond asked if they had done this kind ofthing before. Ms. Athias responded that they have rehabbed 695 Charles, 650 Central, 793 Selby, 713 Aurora, etc. They are professional rehabbers, licensed realtors, brokers, and contractors. They did not own the property when there were a number of suminary abatement orders on it. Mr. Magner added that the new owners need to maintain the exterior of the properiy. The building needs to remain secure; the walks need to be taken care of today; and the yard needs to be cleaned. Ms. Moermond added that the oniy thing that can change her recommendation is if all of this stuff isn't taken caze of by noon, February 4, 2004. Ms. Moermond recommends 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the property on the condition that a bond has been posted by noon February 4, 2004. Appeal of Summary Abatement Orders dated January 6, 2004 and January 16, 2004 at 930 Duchess StreeY. Mr. Magner submitted photographs of the site. Ms. Moermond asked Gary Torgerson if he had pulled building permits. He replied thaT he did. Mr. Magner stated that currently there is a new bond on the property. These two orders are intertwined. In October 2002, Code Enforcement opened a registered category 3 vacant building due to the conditions of the dwelling. At that time, Bazbaza Anderson and Gregory Howard were listed as owners. Sununary Aba#ements were issued to get it secured. In December 2002, Code Enforcement received a vacant buiiding registration form and the vacant building fees were paid, indicating that Mr. Howard had plans to rehabilitate the property. The property changed ownership. His assumption is that David Johnson purchased the properiy, turned right azound and sold it to Mr. Torgerson on a contract-for-deed. A code compliance inspection had been performed in December 2002. Then a performance bond was posted in March 2003 and work commenced. Subsequently, the permits were pulled and work began. Code Enforcement issued some Summary Abatement Orders to clean-up some refuse and deal with vehicles. After the one-year time period expired (September 16) and the work had not been completed, Code Enforcement started the Building Deficiency Inspection Program and issued an order to abate. Mr. Torgerson obtained a new bond on December 27, 2003. Mr. Magner cailed Mr. Torgerson and issued Summary Abatement Orders about keeping the property secure on the site. As you o�-�� j LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JANIJARY 27, 2004 Page 5 can see by the photos, there needs to be extensive foundation work completed. The house sits up against the sidewalk. The photos show boazds and braces set up and there is a fence. The fence needs to stay intact, and this site needs to remain secure because the open excavation creates a safety hazard. The latest concem of Mr. Magner's (January 5, 2004) is that there's a lazge amount of rubble and miscellaneous debris thrown around behind the garage, including some concrete chunks which need to be removed and the yazd needs to be cleaned-up; and the west side gazage window was broken out at the time. Originally, Mr. Magner gave them a January 22, 2004 date because he knew it would take some time to remove the rubble. After a week, Mr. Magner returned to check on the conditions. Mr. Torgerson had taken the initiative to board the gazage, but now some of the boards on the house windows had been tampered with and were loose. Also, the boards were thin plywood which doesn't meet Code EnforcemenPs criteria. Boazds for boazding up windows needs to be at least'/z inch plywood, and they need to be fastened all the way around the window, not just part of it. At that time, Mr. Magner re-issued a new Summary Abatement Order with the same compliance date, January 22, 2004, to make sure the building was secure and to remind Mr. Torgerson that the rubble needed to be removed. After that, an appeal was filed. Mr. Magner was at the site yesterday, January 26, 2004, to check on any progress. He noted that most of the rubble is still on site and some of the windows boards are there, but only partially secured and would not meet Code Enforcement requirements to have the whole window completely covered with'/z inch plywood. Ms. Moermond asked whether work orders were required for the five (5) Summary Abatement Orders. Mr. Magner responded that originally the City did a boarding, prior to Mr. Johnson and Mr. Torgerson taking possession. Subsequently, it looks like only one vehicle work order went through & Mr. Magner wasn't sure whether that vehicle was actually towed. The other things look like they've been addressed. Mr. Torgerson generally does try to take caze of these issues once he's been notified. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Torgerson when he acquired the property. Mr. Torgerson responded that they acquired it about February 2003. He added that the bond hadn't gone a year and expired. Permits were issued on May 14, 2003. On October 24, 2003, Mr. Magner had scheduled an inspection with Jim Seeger and Rich Singerhouse. Mr. Seeger advised Mr. Torgerson to post another $2,000 bond to have time to complete the work. On October 25, 2003, Mr. Torgerson posted another $2,000 bond. The order to take remedial action was not received until November 18, 2003, and he had already taken the action to solve the problem. Mr. Torgerson provided photographs that reflected what had been done to remedy the exposure to excavating under the house. They had formed a piywood wall all the way azound the house so that one couid not fall in the event one stepped off the sidewalk. Ms. Moermond asked how long they will be doing the block work. Mr. Torgerson replied that they aze ready to set the house onto the foundation right now. All the walls aze braced and ready to go. Ms. Moermond questioned them about the rubble. Mr. Torgerson said that it would be no problem at all to remove the concrete chunks. Mr. Magner explained that with the Summary Abatement Order, he was addressing primazily two (2) outstanding issues: 1) the concrete rubbie on the east side of the garage in the back, a cast iron trap, and soine miscellaneous things; and 2) securing the windows with'/z inch plywood nailed ` O� �� LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JANUARY 27, 2004 Page 6 completely azound the window. Mr. Torgerson explained that he'd rather not have the building boazded, but the buildir�g had mostly new thermal pane windows until the kids broke them out. He wish that he could install the new ones, but doesn't want to risk any more breakings. Ms. Moermond recommends denying the appeals and granting and extension to Febniary 9, 2004. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 930 Duchess Street. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Ms. Moermond explained that she wanted to do a couple of conditions that are not normally done to grant the 180 days: fencing or some other means to secure foundation azea from the sidewalk; secure the whole azea from trip/fall hazazd or illegal entry into the building by February 4, 2004. Ms. Moermond recommends granting 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the property on the condition that the following is done by noon of February 4, 2004: 1) the building is entirely secured; 2) the windows are completely boazded with'/z inch plywood; 3) the foundation is completely protected from entry; and 4) the area is free from trip/fall hazazds by use of fencing as appropriate. Resolvtion ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 690 Burr Street. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building. Mr. Magner submitted photographs. Mr. Magner stated that this is a 2-story wood frame duplex on a lot of 5,227 squaze feet. The building was condemned on October 1, 2002 by Code Enforcement and has been vacant since. The current property owner, according to Ramsey County, is Charden M. Gomez, Sr. There has been no contact with Mr. Gomez. Mr. Magner has had previous contact regarding other buildings. It is unclear as to his exact whereabouts. There have been five (5) Sununary Abatement Notices issued to remove accumulated refuse and secure the dwelling. On October 28, 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 nuisance building was issued on November 18, 2003 with a compliance date of December 18, 2003. As of this date, tiie property remains in a condifion that comprises a nuisance as defined by the Legislative Code. The City has had to boazd the building to secure it against trespass. Vacant building fees aze due and owning. Real Estate tases have been paid. TaYation has placed an estimated market value of $13,200 on the land and $25,900 on the building. On December 24, 2002, a code compliance inspection was done. As of December 27, 2004, a bond has not been posted. Code Enforcement estimates the cost of repairs to the structure between $70,000 and $80,000, and demolition between $6,000 and $7,000.