The URL can be used to link to this page

04-499� �/Y/�� - RESOLUTION RATIFYING ASSESSMENT COUNCIL Fi BELOW Assessment No_ SEE BELOW Voting Ward In the matter of the assessment of benefits, cost and expenses for � J0304V1 (8002) Towing of abandoned vehicle from private property during the month of June 20a3. �` �j8 �f�� Sf- LAID OVER BY COUI3CIL ON 4-28-04 to S-OS-04 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 RESOLVED, That the said assessment be and the same is hereby in all respects ratified. RESOLVED FURTHER, That the said assessment be and it is hereby determined to be payable in-8as equal installments ��/f,2 �,C�°� /��.o,� f d� COUNCILPERSON Yeas Nays ✓ Benanav / Montgomery � Bostrom ,/ Thune ,/ xarris ,/ Lantry ,/ Helgen �In Favor �Against Adopted by the Council: Date � p�! Certi�ed Passes by Council Secretary � � � � � Green SI �� DepartmenNoffice/council: PNI - Pubiic Works Date Initiated: �..�a-� �� JV Sheet Green Sheet Green �;..:,�_ Green Sheet � ' 1�6�1 ON•�lg°1 Green Sheet NO: 3015896 Contact Person & Phone• � Deoartment Sent To Person Bruce Engelbrekt //}, � 0 ublic Works ' Bruce Enee@rekt 266-8854 � � Assign 1 ouncil I MarvErickson Must Be on Council Agenda by (Date): Number For Routing Order Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip AI� Locations for Signature) This item was laid over by Counci] on 4-28-04 to 5-5-04, Towing of abandoned velucle from private property during the month of June 2003. File#J0304V1 y r/� 0�� dations: Approve (A) or Reject Planning Commission CIB Committee Civil Service Commissi•an Personal Service Contracts Questions: 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this departmenY? Yes No 2. Has this person/firm ever been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this person/firm possess a skill not normally possessed by any curtent city empbyee? Yes No Explain a11 yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet Initiatin9 Problem, Issues, Opportuniry (WNo, What, When, Where, Why): Property owners or renters create a health hazard at various umes throughout the City of Saint Paul when their property is not kept up. The City is requ'ued by City code to clean up the property and charge the propezty owner for the cost of the clean up. AdvantaAeslfApproved: Cost recovery programs to recover expenses for smnmary abatements, grass cutting, towing of abandoned vehicles, demolitions, garbage hauling and boardings-up. DisadvantaqeslfApproved: None Disadvantages If Not Approved: If Council does not approve these charges, genera] fund would be required to pay the assessment. Totai Amount of 1075 Transaction: Fundinp Source: Green Sheet CwURevenue Budgeted: Activity Number: Financial Information: (Explain) 1 property owner will be norified of the public hearing and charges. ,i � City of St. Paul Dept. of Techxiology & Management Serv REPORT OF COMPLETION OF ASSESSMfiNT COUNCIL FILE NO. File No. SEE BELOW Assessment No. SEE BELOW Voting Ward In the matter of the assessment of benefits, cost and expenses for J0304V1 (8002) Towing of abandoned vehicle from private property during the month of June 2003. LAID OVER BY COUNCIL ON 4-28-04 to 5-05-04 To the Council of the City of St. Paul The Valuation and Assessment Engineer hereby reports to the Council the following as a statement of the expenditures necessarily incurred for and in connection with the making of the above improvement, viz: Total costs Summary Abatement Charge-Code Enforcement Real Estate Service Charge TOTAL EXPENDITURES Charge To Net Assessment $1,030.00 $ $ 25.00 $ 20.00 $1,075.00 $1,075.00 Said Valuation and Assessment Engineer further reports that he has assessed and levied the total amount as above ascertained, to-wit: Che sum of $1,075.00 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 Enqineer, 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 con5idered proper . % �2�� / Z �� Dated ,/C� �, v Valuation and Assessment Engineer � W � a � a a w C� Q � O m � E � � � � N m N N � H ,� ,o ,o , H N a � � (sl � N W�N i O i a�m a�N � �r i �o i U] i o0o II o H� 00 o II o i � i . . . II . � � O ttl O 11 tfl � � i o'1 fV N 11 h � E O+?vt II O i FC � ' �� ,a n N i x � � �� +n � o , n � E � i� U � II i � i ii i W � il � i VI � 000 E�000 i H i O O O � z� O O O t a I . . . � 1 O cl .-1 1 �i1� Q O I Ff I ri 1 U � � i i W i i Wi000 [-! o00 ; rL i o00 a � ,a in o i H � N N � H i � I 1 1 1 I I I I � I [L] �a �U H W � x W � � I 9 W W � z w � �zww � � o�qz� � a��Aw w � FC RC cn �� r � r i N i � ri ti i M i i � z .+ � a� � H � U E O s a�z q ti�o w�� a�ti z Hw� U i E i+ O m � m � �a za� � i i q i q FC � r W � � rCam mx � F u]E W . w0 � Ri 1-'j p 4Q '.1 Ai � a�p� O � � U] h � x � w��0]O � G1E �/].7 3 � i � � � � rl i o i i i � M � a N a x E 0 K z 0 O N � � io m N O J � E � wvi�o� �'oaxz �O �C�q x amz m ro ,, w or+E+�na h�nmv * 000tto 0 0 o n o �II O ul O II ut t'1 N N 11 t`� OvtLt II O n - r+ n � ar n m i II II n u II II II II a ii U 1I ri n �WWii o Q 2 H,'� 11 O K n� r.� U] 11 E il U NE�I10 ooF iiw N a w U a E a w W 0 m a W U � .i ��'�� o� �� MINIJTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDEMNATIONS, AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS Tuesday, Apri127, 2004 Room 330 City Hali, 15 Kellogg Boulevazd West Marcia Moermond, Legisiarive Hearing Officer The hearing was called to order at 10:02 a,m. STAFF PRESENT: Steve Magner, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement (NHPn; Steve Schiller, NHPI Update on 690 Burr Street. Waily Nelson, Renovation, Inc., appeazed and stated he bought the mortgage, he is waiting for a judge to sign the order, and he has a warranty date. Once a judge signs the order, Mr. Neison will sign it all, get title insurance, and start working on the property, probably by next Monday. The judge is suppose to sign the order today. (Mr. Neison gave Ms. Moermond paperwork.) Ms. Moermond asked about posting the $2,000 bond. Mr. Nelson responded as soon as he gets the titie policy, it wiil probably be done Monday or Tuesday. If Ms. Moermond needs it puiled sooner, he will pull it. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Magner has he looked at the rehab plans. Mr. Magner responded that Mr. Nelson has come in, submitted his vacant building registration form, and paid the vacant building fees. Mr. Magner called him about some issues in the yard, and Mr. Neison cleaned it up. Mr. Magner is waiting to bring the resolution back before the City Council for 180 days. Ms. Moermond stated she will ask a Councilmember to bring forward a resolution on May 5. She asked wouid things be in piace by then. Mr. Nelson responded he will make sure he does. Ms. Moermond recommends a resolution granting Mr. Nelson 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the property. (Note: Mr. Nelson pasted the $2,000 performance bond on May 3, 2004.) Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 785 Butternut Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building(s). (Laid over from 4-13-04) The foilowing appeared: Melanie Liska, 1539 Grand Avenue, and Matt Kustritz, EMK Development, 500 Grand Hill. Ms. Moermond stated the last time Ms. Liska spoke, she had just found out that it would be more economical to sell the properiy than to rehabilitate because of the lien on it. There were two LEGISLATNE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 27, 2004 Page 2 purchase options, one of which they are accepting now. Ms. Liska responded yes, and they are scheduled to close tomorrow. Are there rehabilitation plans, asked Ms. Moermond. Mr. Magner responded they are purchasing the properiy and plamiing on doing $40,000 in renovations. T'he Code Compliance Inspection has been performed. The registration fees were paid in December 2003. A registration form needs to be fiiled out by the new owner when ihey have ciosed on the deal. Everything else is in compliance. The yard issue has been solved. Other things need to be taken out of the garages. Ms. Liska responded that wili be done today. Ms. Moermond stated everything is taken caze of except the rehab plans and the bond. Mr. Kustritz responded he plans to post the bond following tomonow's closing. Betty Moran, West Seventh/Fort Road Federation, 974 Seventh Street West, appeared and stated she would like to see the time line when this property would be completed. She would ask that the new owner not make this rental property, as there are enough problems in that neighborhood. She questions the $4�,000 and wonders if that is enough to do the property properly. She will ask the City Council to lay over this address until this information is provided. Ms. Moermond asked does the work program have time lines as to when they pian on having each of these things completed. Mr. Kustritz responded it will ali be done within 180 days. Steve Magner added that the City gives 180 days; if 50% of the work is completed and signed off, then 180 more days can be granted. Ms. Moermond said she wiil be asking for a rehab plan to address the items on the code compliance inspection report with completion dates. It would be great if this could be done in 180 days. It is beyond her jurisdiction to require it to be done beyond 50%. The state code supersedes her decisions here; however, the granting of 180 days is discretionary. Mr. Kustritz responded he wi11 do a plan. Ms. Moermond said she wili recommend that they lay this over for one week so that he has a chance to come up with a plan with dates. She understands he is a professional in the rehab business. Ms. Moermond will expect that he has marketing plans as to whether this will be rental or owner-occupied. Mr. Kustritz responded he plans on selling this it to an owner-occupant. He would normally do renovation and sell the home. Ms. Moermond recommends a layover to the May 5 City Council meeting. At that time, she will be looking for a rehab plan, the bond posted, and a finalized purchase transaction information. The rehab plan will need to be signed off by her and Mr. Magner. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the property at 1456 Feronia Avenue. If the owner faits to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building(s). (Laid over from 4-13-04) The following appeared: Naomi Isaacson, 328 Fourth Street Southeast, Minneapolis; and Rebecca Brown, 1350 South Frontage Road, Hastings. _ �'`-' ��- LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 27, 2004 Ms. Isaacson stated everything the City was ]ooking for was submitted yesterday. Page 3 Steve Magner said that he had a conversation with Jim Seeger (License, Inspections, Environmental Protection) yesterday who spoke with Ed Locke (LIEP) and Frank Berg (LIEP) and indicated the needed information for LIEP has been submitted. Ms. Moermond stated she would like a sign off from LIEP so the owner is able to pull permits as soon as possible this time. Ms. Isaacson stated she has another problem: her two lenders backed out. They were afraid that the City will teaz the building down and they would be out their money. At this point, she cannot pull the pemut as a multi-family on the project. Her only alternative is to rehab it as a single famiiy, like her personal residence. It would be a waste of money to tear the buiiding down. As a personal residence, the cost is reduced to about half. She can be done with it in four months. To do it as a multi-family will cost about $1.2 Million. Ms. Moermond asked was that the plan submitted yesterday to LIEP. Ms. Isaacson responded no. She spent $100,000 on azchitect pians as a multi-family. Other than that, she would have to go back to the drawing boazd. She may have to hire a new azchitect. The City Council may be hesitant to grant 180 days to rehab this as a single family home when its entire purpose is to provide eight housing units, said Ms. Moermond. That is a huge difference in how that land is used. Ms. Isaacson stated she does not have a lender, and she does not have the money to rehab it without fmancing. Ms. Moermond asked has she looked at plans of selling the property. M"s. Isaacson responded she bought it for $365,000 and she has money invested. She cannot sell it for $50,000. She does not know what buyer would be interested in buying it. Mr. Magner stated he has never had a building that has had so many calls. Every week people ask for information about this building. Repeatedly, he has to inform people that his office is not in the business of marketing this property. Ms. Isaacson responded that she feels harassed. She gets phone calls at home, her office, and on her cell phone. People want to buy it for $10,000. She cannot sell it for that. She tells them if they are interested in a serious offer, she will talk to them. She does not know how her phone numbers got out. Ms. Moermond asked what she wants to do. Ms. Isaacson responded to sell it as a single family. She has no alternative, as she does not have the money to do othenvise. Ms. Moermond stated she is looking at an order to remove ar repair the building. In spite of that, she will not recommend to the City Council that this building be rehabilitated as a single family home. The owner can make her case with the City Council. Ms. Moermond wili lay this over for a month for a concrete pian from the owner. One of the things she looks for is the financial wherewithall to rehab the buiiding. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 27, 2004 Page 4 Ms. Isaacson asked if she comes up with a plan in a month to rehabilitate the building as a single family, will Ms. Moermond not recommend that. Ms. Moermond responded that she will not recommend to the City Council that this building be rehabilitated as a single family home. Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the May 25 I,egislative Hearing. Laid Over Summary Abatement: J0309A Property cleanup at 1335 Summit Avenue. (Laid over from 3-24-04 City Council and rescheduled from 4-13-04 Legislative Hearing.) Andrejs Vape, owner, appeared and stated he was at the City Council meeting. Nothing was done by the City and nothing was required. He asked what the City did. Ms. Moermond stated her paperwork indicated there was snow and ice on the sidewalk and work was done to rectify the situation. (A videotape was shown.) Ms. Moermond stated the City shoveled the walk and threw down sait and sand. Orders were mailed on December 17, 2003, about snow on the sidewalk. It was rechecked on December 18, and the work was done on December 24. Mr. Vape explained that he has a large snow removal machine that he used before the compliance date. The day before the required date, it got done. There was snow on the boulevard, so the videotape did not show an adequate picture of what had been done, but the side view ciearly showed there was snow removal. After he did it, the City sent in someone to redo what he had done. There was so much sand and salt on the sidewalk, that it was ridiculous. The sidewalk was literally covered with salt. Other than using a snow scraper, he did everything that could be done. If looking at his record, there has not been a single assessment made against him. He got delayed a day before that because his wife was in the hospital, and he was spending about 24 hours a day with her for about 14'/z months. He did the best a regulaz snow thrower can do. It was at good as most of the sidewalks there. The City made an initial inspection when it had not been done. The City did grave damage to his property and broke the retaining wall. The bricks were knocked off. They laiew they messed it up and did nothing about it. Unless it is corrected, he will be suing the City. There aze scrape marks all along the retaining and there is a chip on the retaining wall. The snow removal has no basis at all for an assessment but the City should assess itself and take care of the damage on the retaining wall. Ms. Moermond stated it looked like Hamline looked better than the Summit side so she would be wiliing to knock off some of the assessment She gave Mr. Vape information to file a ciaim with the Risk Management Office. Ms. Moermond asked is it a snow blowers or shovels used by the work crew. Mr. Magner responded that 98% of the time they use a Skidshear (phonetic), which is like a Bobcat, and has a bucket the same width as the public sidewaik. z�'_� �� LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 27, 2004 Page 5 Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from a total of $225 to $125 plus $70 administrative fees for a total assessment of $195, as it looked like Hamline side looked better than the Suinmit side. Mr. Vape responded Yhat the machine that cleaned off one side aiso cleaned off the other side. Those videos display the real condition of the sidewalk. If the snow blower did the job on one side, then it did the same job on the other side. He fmds the recommendation unacceptable. Laid over Summary Abatements: J0304V To�ving of abandoned vehicles at the following addresses: 367 Geranium Avenue East, 518 Ohio Street. 1843 Stiliwater Avenue, 1160 Minnehaha Avenue East. � 518 Ohio Street Ms. Moermond explained that her paperwork has that an abandoned vehicle was removed for an assessment of $1,030 plus the $45 service charge for a total assessment of $1,075. Joshua Favilla, owner, appeared and stated the vehicle was not his so he could not get it out of the Impound Lot. He did not know whose vehicie it was. It was a friend of a friend's, and Mr. Favilla was supposed to cut it up for this person. He was taking the cab off the truck for a different vehicle. The vehicle owner had parted the truck out and was using the title for a different vehicle. It is legal to do it that way because a person can use multiple parts for multiple vehicles. The owner received an order from the City for May 2, 2002, said Ms. Moermond. It appeared to be an abandoned vehicle. They actually did not come to take it for another seven weeks: June 20. Mr. Favilla responded that he ran out of time and was working a lot on his other job. The vehicle owner came to the house on July 4 and said he had settled up with the Impound Lot and the issue was done and over with. Mr. Favilla asked why this assessment did not go to the owner of the vehicle. Ms. Moermond answered that when the City takes a vehicle off private property, they have to hold the vehicle legally for two weeks. Ms. Nloermond stated she will call the police department and check if the vehicle was there for two weeks and not four days. Mr. Favilla responded he does not know how long it was there, but the friend came over July 4. Ms. Moermond responded that would have been the two weeks. It appears the City towed the vehicle on 3un 20. So, if the friend came on July 4, that would have been the end of the two week holding period for the Police Department. In that case, she wouid recommend approval of the assessment. Mr. Faviila asked why this did not go to the registered owner of the vehicle. Because it was impounded, he had no ability to pull it out of the Impound Lot. Ms. Moermond responded he could have gotten a property manager's tow to have the vehicie towed. Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. At the request of Mr. Favilla, Ms. Moermond also recommends laying over to the May 5 City Council Public Heazing. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF APRIL 27, 2004 367 Geranium Avenue East Page 6 Jonathan B. Oyinloye, owner, appeared and stated he does not live at the property, as it is a rental. He did not receive orders. Steve Magner reported that the Smninary Abatement Order was mailed on Apri17, 2003, to the owner Jonathan Oyinloye at 1520 Birch Lake Boulevard South, White Bear Lake. The vehicle was a black MBW. T'he order was also mailed to the occupant. There was no returned mail. Ms. Moermond stated that the City did send out legal notice. She asked did he get to the property between the beginning of April and the middle of Septernber. Mr. Oyinloye responded that he does go there, but he was not awaze the vehicle was abandoned. Ms. Moermond stated the City's legai requirement is Yo mail the notice to the owner of records. They also mailed the order to the occupant. This is an abandoned vehicle, and the vehicle was there months on end. The owner is responsible for maintaining his property. She will recommend approval of the assessment, and he can appeai to the City Council tomorrow at 530. Mr. Oyinloye stated the renter did not know whose vehicle it was and said it was parked in front of the house and not on the property. If the vehicle is on the pubiic right-of-way, responded Mr. Magner, they wouid tag it under a different ordinance. Ms. Moermond stated she will cali the police department and double check the police report. She will change her recommendation if the address is different. Also, the owner can ask the City Council to reduce or delete the assessment. If he is still not happy with the outcome, he can go to District Court about the assessment. (Note: Ms. Moermond recommends approvai of the assessment, as the police report indicates the vehicle was on the properiy.) 1843 Stillwater Avenue Wendy A. Toner, owner, appeared and stated this is rental property. Letters were mailed to the previous owner Kenneth Brockway (phonetic). Tenants got the mail and did not open it because they didn't know what it was. There was nothing posted on the caz according to the renters. Ms. Toner did not know the car wasn't working. She was told that Brockway is still listed as owner of the property along with her. She bought the property in January 2003. The tenants moved into the property Apri120Q3. Ms. Moermond asked when the notice was sent. Mr. Magner responded there was an ongoing file that started with the complaint on July 25, 2002. Unless a new complaint comes in or the inspector believes there is a change of ownership, NHPI would not go back and run a new ownership. It is even possible that Ramsey County would not have changed the ownership yet. There was an ongoing investigation with this individual in regards to exterior property maintenance. They issued a tag. It looks like ihe properiy changed hands about the first of the year. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 27, 2004 Page 7 Ms. Moermond recommends deleting the assessment as the owner did not receive proper nofice. 1160 Minnehaha Avenue East {No one appeazed.} Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 906 Duchess Street. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building(s). (No one appeared. This property was discussed at the end of the hearing.) Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 271 Maria Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building(s). (Photographs were submitted by Steve Magner.) The following appeared: Raymond Hessler, brother of 7ames Hessler; and Katherine Hessier, Raymond's wife. Mr. Hessler stated that James Hessler is his brother. Steve Magner reported this is a two story duplex. The building was condemned on July 2$, 2003, by Code Enforcement (NHPI) and has been a vacant building since then. The owner is James M. Hessier; however, Raymond Hessler is in control of the properiy. One Summary Abatement Notice has been issued to remove snow and ice from the waik. On January 1, 2004, 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 buiiding was issued on January 30, 2004, with a compliance date of March 2, 2004. As of this date, this property remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The vacant building fees have been paid. Real estate taxes are unpaid of $1,090. Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $29,100 on the land and $71,700 on the building. On October 1, 2003, a code compliance inspection was done. A bond has not been posted. They estimate the cost to repair is $80,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000. Mr. Magner stated when the dwelling was condemned, an action was taken to start a tenants remedy action ('TRA) to rehabilitate this property. It is his understanding that Mr. Hessler said it is cost prohibitive for him to rehahilitate this structure. That is why the TRA did not go further. They agreed to dismiss that action and put the building into an order to abate stance. They had one of the local nonprofits go through the property to get a ballpazk figure for rehabilitation. Ms. Moermond stated she looks for key signals and history, such as has the property been taken care of, reai estate taxes paid, vacant building fees paid, eta These things have not been done on this property. On the plus side, a Code Compliance Inspection has been done. Mr. Hessler stated they were fighting the TRA for six months. The buiiding was Section $ �u LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRiL 27, 2004 Fage $ approved. The tenant decided he couldn't pay the rent, so he figured out a way not to pay the rent. The Hesslers lost rent for ten months. They have a$900 payment every month. Mr. Hessler said he has a lot of property in Saint Paul and the metro azea. Based on budget cuts, people not getting assistance, inspections by the City, and the insurance companies not wanting to ensure houses with peeling paint, it is a tough time for landlords right now. A lot of landlords can't rent buildings. He has listed the house with Callahan Realty. It has a$118,000 mortgage on it, so he does not want it knocked down and it is fixable. He has eight buildings with major code compliances. He needs time to seil it or rehab it himself. He asked how much time he has to do that. Mrs. Hessler stated they had not gone through the TRA before. They were told that there was funding to do the renovations. They were assigned an administrator. When looking at the time line and the lack o�work being done on the building, it is not because they decided not to do anything. It was because they were told there was funding available. This went on for months until she called an inspector and asked about the funding. She was told there is funding for smaller projects, but not on the magnitude of 271 Mazia. This was never explained to them before. They finaliy hired an attorney, had the TRA dropped, put this individual in another unit, and he lived free unfil July. They finally got this resolved. Information needs to be passed on to people. Ms. Moermond stated this is a hearing on tl�e order to remove or repair the building. They need to take active steps to pursue the rehab part of the order. The remove part will proceed on its on. She is looking for a rehab plan that address all the items in the compliance order, financial wherewithal to execute the rehab, general wherewithal to do this in a timely fashion, and time lines for the work. The fact that the taxes are not paid it not a good sign. Also, they need to post a performance bond with the City that will be refunded back to them after the completion of the project. They can do the rehab on their own or sell it. It is in legislative hearing now because the City is pushing to do something with it soon. If they sell iY, she would look for a purchase agreement. The rehab has to be done, done properly, ar the City will knock it down. James Rust, 267 Maria, appeazed and stated people in the neighborhood would like to see something positive going with the buiiding. The neighbors shovel the walk in the winter and pick up the trash. He has people Irnock on his door asking about the building wanted to buy it. Mr. Rust does not think the owner will get $118,000 for that property. It needs a lot of work and it is a nice looking building. He was inside last winter. The front foyer had exposed two by fours, no insulation, and it was coid inside the house. It is an eyesore. Mr. Rust is one of the houses on the Minneapolis/Saint Paul Home Tour this weekend, and will have about a thousand people going through the house and they will ask about the house next door. Tfze neighborhood reaily wants something done with this. They would like someone to rehabilitate it instead of an empty lot there. Mr. Magner responded that if there is a home tour and a thousand people coming through, it would behoove the owners to actively market it during that fime. It is in the historic district and rehabilitation will have to be done under the HPC (Heritage Preservation Commission) guidelines. The property can be saved. Once the property has been idenYified as having issues, NHPI has to enforce the ordinances. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF APRIL 27, 2004 Page 9 Mr. Hessler stated he is doing 38 homes in one yeaz and putting out a lot of money. So, if he can take advantage of City funding, he will try to do that. They were misied and that is why nothing was done. Mr. Hessler would agree with Mr. Rust. He wi11 try to sell it within the next few weeks. The house is worth $118,000 and was appraised at $170,000 when he bought it. He asked is 180 days granted to sell it or rehab it. Ms. Moermond responded the 180 days is to do a rehabilitation of the property and not to sell it. This goes to Council on May 5, and she would like the Hesslers to contact her by noon of May 5 about whether they are going to rehabilitate it or sell it. Mr. Hessler responded he wouid like to say now that he is going to rehabilitate it and get the 180 days. Mr. Magner stated if the owner is going to rehabilitate the property based on the Code Compliance Inspecrion, the basic building permit will be held up with the HPC. That would eat into the 180 days. Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the May 11 Legislative Hearing and the May 26 City Council Public Hearing. Having to go to the HPC will slow things down progress. Because they do not do rehabilitation everyday, she wili ask for the following: a rehabilitation plan with concrete steps, evidence Yo show financial wherewithal to do this plan, taxes paid, and the $2,000 bond posted for performance. The Code Compliance Inspection has a long list of items. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 1842 Benson Avenue; appellant: She91a L. Knudson. (No one appeared.) Marcia Moermond recommends denying the appeal. Appea! of Summary Abatement Order at 1$54 Benson Avenue; owner: Janet M. Pelzei. Steve Schiiler, NHPI, reported he was in the azea on another matter, saw this issue, and wrote it up. The shed/guage combination is extremely deteriorated. It is unknown how it made it through the winter. He issued the orders to remove the badiy deYeriorated shed and gazage and clean out the inside. Janet Pelzel, owner, appeazed and stated she is looking for more time to get this done. She bought the house on a contract-for-deed and had it paid off in 2000. She only paid $24,000 at that time. It needed a lot of fixing up. In 1999, she had an order for septic and she was given an extension. The gazage is horrible looking. When they did the remodeling, they didn't take things, and she put these things in her garage. 5he planned on getting rid of it. She lost her job a couple of months ago, so the other co-owner Meredith Cole was the oniy one warking far a couple of months. Ms. Peizel got a job a week ago and gets another one next week, so she will get back on her feet. She tried to get loans, but there was only one person working. Ms. Moermond asked for a guess on the demolition of the garage. Mr. Magner responded that if the City tore it down, it wouid be the limit of their abatement of $3,000. If the owner was to bid this out to a private contractor, it may be done for half that much, especially if the City was not involved. They can call a licensed handyman or a licensed garbage hauling service because it is a LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF APRIL 27, 2Q04 Page 10 one story gazage with a fairly flat or low slope roo£ It may cost $1,000 or $1,500. It couid also potentially go through a chore service. Ms. Pelzel stated she talked to Mr. Schiller who told her to write a letter and he could give her an extension, but she talked to some peopie who told her to file an appeal because she only has a certain amount of time. Mr. Schiller responded he told her to write him a letter to save her some time. Ms. Pelzel stated she called some garbage haulers and she was told to go through her regulaz company, BFI. She has a letter that it would cost $500 for a 40 yard dumpster for five days. She has people willing to help her teaz the garage down. Ms. Scl�iller stated people have to be very careful. The support members of the structure have rotted and failed. People should have hazd hats on because things can tumbie down. The machinery has safety cages over them. Safety should be dealt with first. Ms. Moermond asked is the building secure. Mr. Magner responded they could issue a summary abatement to the owner and bid this through a private contractor for demolition and come back with a dollaz amount. The $70 administration charges would be added to the demolition fees, and then the City could assess it. Then, she would have an avenue to ask for it to be spread out over a period of time. Ms. Moermond stated if the City does it, it will end up as an assessment on her property tases. Ms. Pelzel interrupted and said that she cannot have that because her insurance man said it would be assessed on the taYes and the insurance company would drop her. Mr. Magner responded that this could be laid over; in the meantime he could solicit bids for the demolition of tAe garage. It is true that if the City was taken substantial abatement action would violate her mortgage, but a minor action does not meet the thresl�old for foreclosure. Ms. Moermond stated they have unheard of an insurance company telling someone they might lose their xnortgage for a cleanup under $3,000. She is willing to talk to the insurance person if Ms. Pelzei gives her the information. Mr. Magner added that the insurance company may need Ms. Pelzel's consent to call. Mr. Schiller said that he wanted to make it clear that the City has no intention of going after this property. His major concern is how deteriorated the stnxcture is and hying to figure ouY how to get it removed without hurting someone. Ms. Moermond recommended laying over to the May 11, 2004, Legislative Hearing. In the meantime, Mr. Magner wi11 see how much he can bid it out for. If the owner wants her to call the insurance agent, Ms. Moermond will need the policy number and permission to call. She suggested Ms. Pelzel go to the LIEP Office to see if they have information on demolition. Staff says this is dangerous, so a flyer on doing this would be heipful. LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINIJTES OF APRIL 27, 2004 Page 11 Resolution ordering fhe owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 906 Duchess Street. If fhe owner fails to compIy with the resolution, Code Enforcement is ordered to remove the building(s). (No one appeared.) (Photographs were submitted by Steve Magner.} Mr. Magner reported it was summary abated three times, no one has come forrvard as owner, NHPI has done due diligence notifying parties of record and the mortgage company; therefore, they are seeking a resolution to remove or repair in 15 days. Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the resolution. The hearing was adjoumed at 11:55 a.m. rrn � ��' MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEAR.ING O�E' �� ORDERS TO REMOVE(REPAIR, CONDEMNATIONS, AND ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS Tuesday, May 11, 2004 Room 330 Ciry Hall, 15 Kellogg Boulevard West Marcia Moermond, Legislative Aearing Officer The hearing was cailed to order at 10:02 a.m. STAFF PRESENT: Steve Magner, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement (NHPn; Steve Rice, Planning and Economic Development; Harold Robinson, NHPI Note: Ali of the properties today will be before the City Council for ratification on May 26. The following addresses were laid over to the lvlay 25 Legislative Aearing because files were not available for these properties or the owners requested a layover: 1063 Dale Street North 949 Sherburne Avenue (J0401A), 932 Iroquois Avenue (J0401A), 515 York Avenue (J0401 V), 1591 Tavior Avenue (J0401A), 1120 Pavne Avenue (30401�, 911 Wilson Avenue (30401 V), 233 Sherburne Avenue (J0401� Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 271 Maria Avenue. If the owner faSls to comply tii�ith the resolution, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement is ordered #o remove the building(s). (Laid over from 4-27-04) Raymond Hessier appeared and stated the HPC (Historic Preserva#ion Commission) just got back to him on Friday. At the previous legislative hearing, Ms. Moermond wanted Mr. Hessler to pay the properfy taxes, pay the performance bond, and provide a financial plan. Mr. Hessler has paid the tases, posted the bond, and will be bankrolling the project himself with backup money from East Bank. As for the concrete plan Ms. Moermond asked for, he had to find out the HPC's guidelines first. He pians to start on the roof and soffits. He has companies ready to start on the plumbing and heating. He has his own crew that wiil do a lot of the cosmetics. Ms. Moermond stated she wiil be looking for a time line for addressing each item on the Code Compliance Inspection List. Her xecommendarion wili be 180 days to complete the rehabilitation plan. She will get copies of his information. She would like the paperwork prior to the City Councii meeting on May 26. Mr. Hessler asked does he need to be there on May 26. Ms. Moermond responded he does not have to be there if he has everything in. His councilmember is Kathy Lantry. Her concem is that this be undertaken and completed as quickly as possible, and it sounds like NIr. Hessler is planning to do that. Ms. Magner recommends 180 days to complete the rehabilitation of the property on condition that a time line and a rehabilitation plan is provided to her by noon of May 26, 2004. (Mr. Hessler left paperwork with Ms. Moermond.) _ MINLTTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 2 Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 785 Butternut Avenue. If the owner fails to comply �i�ith the resolution, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement is ordered to remove the building(s). (Laid over from 4-27-04) Marcia Moermond stated that Counciimember Thune heard from the district council and they wanted a layover longer than what was discussed at the last legislative hearing. Matt Kushitz, 500 Grand Hiil, appeazed and stated he has a rehabilitation plan and photographs. (He explained his documents to Ms. Moermond.) Ms. Moermond stated she will provide the district council a copy of the rehabilitation plan. Looking at it quickiy, it is exactly what the City needs. Mr. Magner added that he has a copy of the plan. Ms. Moermond recommends granting 180 days to compiete the rehabilitation on the property. {Mr. Kustritz submitted the photographs.) Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 1854 Benson Avenue; owner: Janet M. Pelzei. (Laid over from 4-27-04) Janet Pelzel, owner, appeazed. Since the last legisiative hearing, reported Steve Magner, he looked at the site and the garage is a dilapidated structure and in peril of collapse. He agrees with the inspector that they need an abatement order to remove it. Mr. Magner sent bids to the purchasing department. He is still waiting for bids to remove the garage and associated lean-to. Marcia Moermond asked has the owner looked into additional information far costs. Ms. Peizei responded a 40 yard duxnpster would be around $600. She does not know if they come bigger. Mr. Magner responded 40 is the largest they generally come. Ms. Moermond stated this is the owner's judgement call about how she wants to proceed. The structure is unstable. To knock it down, the owner wouid hopefully get safety training and equipment. The City doing it would cost a m�imum of $3,OOQ. Ms. Pelzel stated she went to get the permit and was told that she does not need safety training, but would need a permit. Ms. Moermond staYed she will give two weeks far the owner to remove the garage or the City will take it down. If the City does it, it will become a bill first, Ms. Pelzel can choose to appeal the assessment, and Ms. Moermond can spread the payment over five years. Ms. Moermond cailed Ms. Pelzel's insurance company and talked with the insurance agent, and there are no problems as long as Ms. Pelzel is dealing with the situation that has arisen with the structuxe. Ms. Pelzel stated she would like to make the decision now to let the City do it. MINt3TBS OF THE LEGISLATIVE AEAR.ING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 3 In that case, Ms. Moermond recommends denying the appeai and making the effective date today (May 11) so that the paperwork can be processed to get the garage knocked down. J0309A2 Property cleanup at 1819 Sheridan Avenue. (City Council referred back to the Legislative Hearing Officer) Jacob Beilinsky, 1813 Sheridan Avenue, appeared Hazold Robinson reported that there are two abatement assessments for public sidewalks, ice, and snow. One was February 1, 2004, and the other was December 24, 2003. He has videotapes of both of them. Mr. Magner responded this was a dwelling the City abated for a substantial abatement process. The ownership is stili listed as Scott A. Walz. The ajacent property owner Jacob Bellinsky has now purchased the properry and he never received notice on the suminary abatement because it was aiready mailed to Mr. Walz, who is missing. Ms. Moermond asked when the abatement occurred. Mr. Bellinsky responded the quick-claim and wananty deeds were filled out on February 18 and filed on March 24. He shoveled the walk himself during the year. One time he shoveled it, it snowed again, and a neighbor complained on it. He spent $13,000 for the back taxes and $8,500 for the demolition of the house. He has no more money to put into this property. He wanted to see if there was any way to delete or negoriafe the last two assessments. He is mowing the lawn, hauling away garbage, trimming trees, and starting to make it look nice for the community. Mr. Robinson reported one order was sent out January 28, 2004, by the Citizen Service Office. The inspector went there on January 30, went back on February 5, and then sent the wark order. The other assessment was done on December 24, 2003, the letter went out on December 1$, and the inspector went out on December 22. Ms. Moermond recommends deleting both assessments. When the deed search was done, these assessments did not show up as pending, and Mr. Bellinsky did not receive proper notification of the second assessment because the property was not changed into his name. (The other assessment that was deleYed is under the next item.) Summary Abatements: J0401A Property cleanup during January and February 2004; J0401V Towing of abandoned vehicles from private property during August through November 2003; J0401B Boarding-up of vacant buildings during January and February 2004. 911 Wilson Avenue (J0401� Per the owner's request prior to the meeting, Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the May 25 Legislative Hearing. MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 4 1120 Payne Avenue (70401i� Per the owner's request prior to the meeting, Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the May 25 Legislative Hearing. 1819 Sheridan Avenue (J0401A) (See laid over assessment for the same address on the previous page.) Marcia Moermond recommends deleting the assessment. 1063 Dale Street North (J0401A) San T. Vo, owner, appeared. Marcia Moermond recommends laying over to the May 25 Legislarive Hearing as the file was not available for this address. 949 Sherburne Avenue (J0401A) Steve Rice provided English-Spanish interpretation for this property. Jaime Garcia, owner, appeared. Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the May 25 Legislative Hearing as the file was not availabie on this property. 932 Iroquois Avenue (J0401A) Duane Renvilie, owner, appeared. Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the May 25 Legislative Hearing as the file was not available on this property. 515 York Avenue (J0401� Cherf Pao Thao, owner, appeared. Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the May 2i I,egislative Hearing as the file was not available on this property. 1591 TaYlor Avneue (J0401A) George Oxford, owner, appeared. MINtJTES OF THE LEGISLATNE HEAI2ING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 5 Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the May 25 L,egislative Hearing as the file was not availabie on this property. 1054 Arkwri�t Street (J0401A) I3ancy, owner's daughtez, agpeared and stated the family did not own the properiy until February 5, which was the day of the closing. Ms. Moermond recommends deleting the assessment as the present owner did not receive proper notice. This is a snow and ice situation. Orders were mailed on February 5, and the work was done February 14. 971 Aurora Avenue (J0401A) Marcia Moermond c�piained that this is discarded fiuniture on the property. Lewis Berry, owner, appeared and responded it was not on the praperty; it was in the alleyway beside the gazage. The police called it in. This furniture was dumped. (A videotape was shown.) When it is close to the garags, asked Ms. Moermond, is it considered the public right-of-way or private property. 3teve Ma�er responded it is not a clear definition, but his office handles it as follows: if the item is in the physical right-of-way of the alley, center or edge of the blacktop that has been oiled or paved by the city, then it is the responsibility of the City to remove the item. If the item is abutting the surface, such as up against the garage, or the nonoiled or paved area between a shucture and the paved or oiled right-of-way itself, then it is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner. If it is a nonpaved or non oiled alley, then it becomes the mid line of the alley right-of-way, and the adjacent property owner's responsibility. Ms. Moermond asked was is it a grauel or paved alley. Mr. Berry responded it is paved. Mr. Magner explained that the inspector received a complaint and went there. The items were against the garage, and is the adjacent property owner's responsibility to remove it. Ms. Moermond asked were there phone calls, according to the files. Mr. Robinson responded no. Ms. Moermond stated she is looking at orders that the City mailed him to remove the fiuniture on December 15 and again the end of December. The work crew did the work at the end of January. She is suspicious now that he says it is the pubic right-of-way when he has been receiving orders in the mail to take care of this. She also sees there is a history of refuse violations at the property. This means the City has mailed orders in the past, and the owner has received them. MINL3TES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 6 Mr. Berry stated he does not remember receiving any notice to that. Being in the back of his property, he did not think it was his responsibility to remove it because it was in the alley. He has gazbage service. Ms. Moermond responded that the property technically extends to The middle of the alley and the CiYy will maintain the right-of-way. Mr. Robinsott responded that is conect. The inspector did not think it was impeding trafiic. Otherwise, Public Works will pick it up. Ms. Moermond asked how many refuse violations in the past two years. Mr. Robinson respanded a summary abaiement order was issued on February 27, 2003, and a work order was sent on March 11. Another order was issned on October 24, 2001. There were five trips out there from September 27 to October 27, 2000 for refuse. Ms. Moermond stated notices were sent out twice. She will �ock $100 off. If he ever gets another notice and there aze quesrions, he should call it in. If she sees it in here again, she will assume he knew and chose not to act responsibly. Mr. Berry responded he is legally blind. He had someone read paperwork for him. Mr. Moermond stated he should call in the future. There are a lot of people that come in to legislative hearings who are disabled, English is a second language, etc., and they are taking caze of their yazd and being held to community standards. The City would like to help him get the notices read. Ms. Moerxnond asked could there be a note in the file to make a phone call. Mr. Robinson responded that some inspectors call when they send a work order. 'i'his time of yeaz, inspectors can get busy, but Mr. Robinson will make a note of it. Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from a total of $323 to $153 plus the $70 service fees for a total assessment of $223. 260 Baker Street East (J0401V) {No one appeared.) Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. 1695 Bums Avenue (J0401A) (No one appeared.) Ms. Moer�nond recommends approval of the assessment. 2134 Bush Avenue (J0401A) Marcia Moermond stated these are two sepazate assessments that aze together for cleanups that were done on December 20, 2003 and Pebruary 6, 2004. MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 7 Eugene R. Smith, owner, appeazed and stated he got back home the end of April from down south. He got the notice in the maii about this hearing and was told it was for snow and ice removal. He has had someone take care of that for seven years, and Mr. Smith thought it was taken care of. The City sent him a no6ce on the second one. It was addressed as Occupant and the post office marked it undeliverable and sent it back. So, Mr. Smith never got a notice. It is his responsibility to take caze of it, but the City is supposed to warn him ahead of time. Mr. Smith has documents to pzove he was down south. Mr. Smith has documents &om Xcel Energy that he is a seasonai customer. Hazold Robinson reported a letter was returned on February 25 as not deliverabie as addressed to Occupant. The Citizen Service Office also would have sent a letter out to Mr. Smith because he is listed in AMANDA {computer system). Tlie occupancy letter came back as undeliverable; the - post office obviousiy had forwazding for the other letters. It was mailed to Mr. Smith and to Occupant. Ms. Moermond stated staff is saying two notices were sent out on both occasions. One notice went in Mr. Smith's name at 2134 Bush, and the other went to "Occupant" at 2134 Bush. The Occupant letter came back to the City, and the other d'ad not come back. It looks like Mr. Smith received proper notice. Whether or not he is staying in his house, he is responsibie for maintaining the sidewalk and mowing the lawn. Ms. Moermond recommends approvai of the assessment citing the following: the owner is responsible for maintaining his property in a code compliance manner, notices were properly sent to the owner and he did not get them through no fault of the Caty. She asked would the owner like to pay the assessment over time. Mr. Smith responded he would pay it. Mr. Magner added that the owner could get a copy of the notice from the Citizen Service O�ce, as these are computer generated letters. 733 Case Avenue (J0401 V) The following appeared: Chao Lee, owner, 13455 Riverdale Drive, Coon Rapids; Belinda Hogan, tenant. Mr. Lee said the vehicle belongs to his tenant. Back in September 2003, he and his wife spoke to Ms. Hogan about the vehicle. She explained that she was in the process of saving money to repair the vehicle. They talked about deducting $50 to $75 off her rent every month to get the vehicle running again. He did not want her to park it on the street, which is why it was in the back of the property, which he thought would prevent the uehicle from getting towed The vehicle was on rocks in the back of the yard. He is not sure when the vehicle was towed, but souietime last year when he was collecting rent, she asked had he towed the vehicle. He said no and to call the police. He referred her to call the police to report it stolen. One day he came to pick up rent, she gave him a letter about this hearing. On September 26, 2003, reported Mr. Robinson, there was a vehicle on the properry with expired tabs that appeared inoperable or undriveable or missing parts. Also, the City issued a summary abatement for refuse and debris in the yazd on the same day. The inspector went back for a MINLTTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARiNG OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 8 reinspection on October 3, 2003 and everything was the same. A work order was sent to Parks and to the police department. The police towed the vehicie to the Impound Lot for expired tabs and for appearin� inoperable. Mail was sent to China Lee and Chao C. L,ee at 733 Case Avenue. Mr. Lee responded that is not his address. He asked where he can go to get his address changed. Mr. Robinson responded he needs Yo go to Ramsey County Tasation to get that changed. Mr. Lee stated he was having a problem with taxes and the tenants were not giving him notice. He was at Ramsey County about two months ago going over ta�ces with them and changing the address. In answer to questions, Mr. Lee responded this is a duplex on a corner lot located on a busy street. He goes there about once or twice a month. He does not have a property manager. The previous year he had a downstairs tenant who took care of the lawn, eta Ms. Hogan suffers from MS and forgets things. There are times when she has given him money way over or way under what the rent is. He does not understand why Code Enforcement (NIIPn wouid not knock on the door, get ahold of him some other way, or give it to the tenant. Ms. Moermond asked is this properiy registered under the Rental Registration Program. Mr. I,ee responded yes. Mr. Magner stated the inspector may have picked up information from the ownership posting at the front door per the ordinance. Ms. Moermond will like confirmation that this properiy is in the Rental Registration Program. (While Mr. Magner checked to see if this property was registered, Ms. Moermond heard other appeals. Then, she came back to this address.) Ms. Moermond asked when he identified he had a problem with the real estate taa�es going to the wrong address. Mr. I,ee responded he took a day off work to deal with it. He has owned this property for about three years. For the first year, taxes were taken out of the mortgage so he didn't see them. In 2003 was when he got billed; i# may have even been December 2003. Ms. Moermond stated the rental registration was in order. She is frustrated because it was his responsibility to tell the taY people where to find him. Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from a totai of $615 to $135 plus the $70 service fees far a total assessment of $205. 745 Case Avenue (3D401� (No one appeazed.) Ms. Moermond recommends approval ofthe assessment. MINUTES OF THE LEGLSLATTVE HEARING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 9 1170 Conwav Street (30401� (No one appeared.) Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment 1459 Danforth Street (J0401� Kenneth Johnson, 6980 27�' Street North, Oakdale, owner, appeazed and stated his adult children live at the property. He had a tenant—not one of lus children—who abandoned a vehicle for about three months. He called the City of Saint Paul. He was told that if he calls the police department and reports it abandoned, then he would not be responsible for it. Both cars were ticketed for abandonment and expired tabs. Before a person can argue their case before a traffic officer, St can take ten days. In the meantime, both vehicies got towed. He went down the next day to the Impound Lot and was told he could junk it to the City. As for the other vehicle, he was told he could not do anything about it because it is not his car. He was told that as long as its junked to the City, he is okay. He went to the hearing officer who threw out the abandorunent. Ae paid the tickeYs for expired tabs. Ms. Moermond stated they are looking at the towing and storage costs for $782.90. The Ciry has to hold a vehicle for two weeks before they are auctioned or junked. Ms. Moermond would like to get paperwork from the Tmpound Lot to find out what is going on here. He can call any private company to do the towing after he gets a mana�ers tow to have it removed. Mr. Magner added that he needs to call the police deparhnent to have a police officer meet him at the site to tag the vehicle as a managers tow. If the police had a work order, then it can be towed, and the City would pay the contractar the towing. It sounds like the work order went out there before it got to that point. Mr. 7ohnson asked could Ms. Moermond take into consideration that he initiated this by cailing. Ms. Moermond responded yes. (Ms. Moermond's recommendarion is forthcoming.) 515 Desnoyer Avenue �70401A} The following appeared: Arnold 01son, 3109 Stinson Boulevard NE, St. Anthony; and Shirley, his wife. Mr. Olson staYed he has a problem with a tenant. She doesn't pay rent or she pays 1/10 of it. The Olsons have cleaned the area a few times. They talked to Andy Dawkins (NHPn who said that the City will be over to clean it up. Mr. Olson went over there the day before, and someone was working on it. There wasn't that much there. The Oisons probably don't do what they shouid, but they feel sorry for the tenants because a lot of them have financial problems, w}uch is the Oisons problem, too. They pay $54,000 in tases. Tfiey were over there to clean it up and a couple of days later, he was in the hospital with a pacemaker. The woman living there said that they could not ask them to leave, but the inspector said that Mr. Olson can. MINLTTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 10 Mrs. Olson said that they talked to Mr. Dawkins on 7anuary 14, 2004, and he said they had until 7anuary 16 before the City would clean it up. The Olsons removed some of the stuff themselves on January 14 and Jay (son) was coming with the huck on January 15, but that was when the City came to clean it up. Ms. Moermond responded that her paperwork has that orders were mailed to do the cleanup on December 1, aud the cleanup was supposed to be done by 7anuary 2, 2004. It got checked on 7anuary 13, and the work was done by the City on January 15. She is hearing the Olsons say that Andy Dawkins said the cleanup crew was going out on January 16. Mr. Robinson reported that there is nothing in the file from Mr. Dawkins. There is a note that Steve Schiller (NHPn talked to the owner on January 13 and the owner staYed his intentions to call Mr. Dawkins. Mr. Schilier went out on 7anuary 20, and it had been cleaned up by the City on January 15. Mr. Dawkins normal practice is to talk to the inspector first. Ms. Moermond stated she needs to talk to Mr. Dawkins to see if he told them January 16. She is hesitant because it was two weeks aSer the deadline when they called the inspector. Mrs. Olson responded some of the items were put there after the deadline. Some things were taken away themselves. Ms. Moermond responded it is hard for the City inspector to know the old stuff from the new stuff. Mr. Robinson added that the City is at the property a lot. The inspector cannot make allowances for a bad tenant issue. Mr. Oison stated the tenant disconnected all the smoke detectors. Ms. Moermond asked is there a lease. Mrs. Olson responded it is verbaL Ms. Moermond responded he needs to consult with an attorney or a group such as Saint Paul Association of Responsible Landlords. The owner has rights as well. It looks like the owner will owe the complete assessment. If Mr. Aawkins said January 16, then she wili Irnock some money off. Mr. Olson added that his family has been in that area for four generations. (Ms. Moermond's recommendation is forthcoming.) 1033 Hawthorne Avenue East (J0401A) (No one appeared.) Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. 233 Sherburne Avenue (J0401V} (The owner could no longer wait.) Ms. Moermond xecommends laying over to the May 25, 2004 Legislative Hearing. MlI�TUTES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 11 858 Iessamine Avenue East {J0401� Cher Vue, owner, appeared and stated he has a large family and has a hard time putting food on the table. He requested that the assessment be reduced or he can make payments over the next rivo or three yeazs. This vehicle belonged to his son. After the son purchased the vehicle, he found out his drivers license was not good anymore. That is why he did not register the caz. It has been there far about a year. Mr. Vue asked what kind of caz it was. Mr. Robinson responded a silver Mazda. Marcia Moermond recommends spreading the assessment over a five-year period due to financial hardship. Mr. Vue asked could more money be knocked off. Ms. Moertr�ond responded that he will have to go to the City Council on May 26. 2171 Kna� STreet (J0401A} Neil Dieterich, owner, appeared and stated he always removes his ice and snow. Then, the city comes by and piows Como Avenue. The snow plow throws the snow off of Como Avenue onto his sidewaik. It freezes and he works on aY some more. He has a long sidewalk, and it is busy. This is why he has had so many compla3nts over the year. He puts down salt and sand, and he cannot totaliy remove it. There was a big snowfall in the first of February, and there was little snow between then and when this property was inspected. He removed the snow on February 2 or 3, and ii froze when the City plowed it. He goes through and removes everything he can remove, then he chops the ice, and gets it down to the sidewalk. He had removed everything on top. He has complained to Public Works. He was told it took 1'!z hours to do so, but Mr. Dieterich was there and it did not take more than %z hour. At $150 an hour, 1.5 hours is $225 and not $295. Mr. Robinson reported that one hour is $225. Ms. Moermond added that there is the $70 service fees for a total of $295. (A videotape was shown.) Ms. Moermond asked did he cali the City to say he was working on it. Mr. Dieterich responded the City has told him in the past that he is legally obligated to remove as much as he can and put down salt and sand. He gets notices all the tune because of this problem. He does not want people to have a problem, and fa11 down. He works at it very hard. With the City continuing to piow snow onto his sidewaik, there are limits to what he can da He owns the front part and all the way up to as far as he can see. Ms. Moermond stated he was working on snow removal on February 2 or 3, ozders were mailed on February i l, and the cleanup was on February 21. That is almost three weeks between the initial snow event and when the work crew came in. Mr. Dieterich responded he removed the snow fairly soon after it snowed. After that, the City plows the street and filis up the sidewalk enYirely. He removed all the snow he can remove and then puts down salt and sand. That was MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATNE HEARING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 12 his obligarioa Then, he goes back and chops to get down to the pavement. He worked on that every night. If he gets down to the actual pavement, then it is easier to get that snow off when the City plows Como Avenue onto his sidewalk. There is no sun there, so it lasts until March or April. Ms. Moermond recommends reducing the assessment from a totai of $295 to $130 pius the $70 service fees for a totai assessment of $200. 811 I,afond Avenue (70401� (No one appeazed.) Ms. Moermond recommends approvai of the assessment. 1171 Lawson Avenue East (70401 V} (No one appeared.) Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. 988 Marshall Avenue (J0401A) (No one appeared.) Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. 1627 Marshall Avenue (J0401� Philip Varchenko, owner, appeared and stated this is about a car towed on December 4, 2003. The work order says it was a white car, but the car towed was a black Volva It did not have piastic on the taiiligyt nor a hvnk lock. He has several vehicles, and received several conection notices. It eventually got towed. By the rime the police showed up, it was towed for expired tabs, but that was not an issue in the correction order. Aazold Robinson reported the original order issued was for two vehicles: a black unl�iown, FPZ 796, and a white car, OSSPYV. An impound order was issued for the unknown caz, white, FPZ 796. The police towed that vehicle, but it was clearly brown. The police officer agreed with the inspector that it was inoperable and missing vital components. The only thing in question was the color of the caz, whzch was snow covered. Ms. Moermond stated she will get the police report on this. It is the City's practice to give proper notice. Mr. Varchenko responded that he does admit he got the notices and he was correcting them as he could. He assumed that everything was in order. When he got a copy of the work order, he found it was actually one month behveen the time the work order was issued and the car was towed. MINUTES OF THE LEGISLATNE HEt�RING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 13 (Ms. Moermond's recommendation is forthcoming.) 1120 McLean Avenue (J0401� The following appeared: Terin and Deauna Meyers, owners. Mr. Myers stated he had a company van in his driveway. The company was being soid, and there was a court batGle. For months, he did not know whose truck it was. He paid to get the fuel filter changed, but he could never get it running over 30 miles per hour. Mrs. Meyers added that there was a restraining order issued to the ex-boss to stay away from the company and ail employees, but Mr. Meyers was trying to get him to take the truck. Mr. Meyers stated he was laid off and did not have ihe money to get it towed. Mrs. Meyers added that a police officer told them that if there is an abandoned vehic]e in the driveway that they do not own, they should call the police and that it never comes back to them. It will fall on the owner of the vehicle. Ms. Moermond asked if there is information about the police officer. Harold Robinson responded the case number 3s 03-257-6'71. The officer gave incorrect information. Ms. Moermond stated she will look into this further. It appears the officer gave the wrong information; however, the officer is a representative of the City of Saint Paul and the City would have to accept the mistake. She will check with the police deparnnent and make sure the police o£ficer has the correct information to provide other cirizens. (Ms. Moermond recommendation is forthcoming.) 994 Reanev Avenue (J0401A) Ying Yang, owner, appeared and stated he received the letter in the mail and would like to laiow what was taken out. Marcia Moermond responded it looks like the City shoveled the sidewalk. (A videotape was shown.) Ms. Moermond recommended approval of the assessment. 876 Rice Street (70401A) Pavel Zakhazov, 1691 Seventh Street East, owner, appeared and stated this is a rental. He would like to see the videotape. The tenants said they took care of it. (A videotape was shown.) After looking at the videotape, Mr. Zakharov said "Alright " Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. MINiTTES OF'THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF MAY 11, 2004 Page 14 1261 Seventh Street East (70401� The landlord appeared and stated he was in the process of evicting the tenant. If it didn't have expired tabs, he was told he couldn't tow it. Because of the eviction proceedings, he was cazeful of what he did at the property. Hazold Robinson reported that on September 16, 2003, the summary abatement was issued: Lacks current license tabs, appears undriveable or inoperable, a black Chevrolet and a red Ford. One car was towed by the police deparhnent on September 30, 2003. The landlord said he called the police department to find out what he should do. Tabs were not expired on the red car. Mr. Robinson responded in the affirmative. Ms. Moermond added that it was expired for more than three months at that point. Ms. Moermond recommends approval. She is not hearing anything that says she needs to decrease the assessment. 674 Fuller Avenue (J0401A, J0401B) The following appeared: Mercedes Henderson, owner, and Delores. Steve Magner reported this is a rea stered vacant building. That sununary abatement was mailed to Mercedes 7. Henderson at 1095 Overlook Road, West Saint Paul. It was also sent to 674 Fuller Avenue. The inspection occurred on December 30 with the order mailed on December 31 with a compliance date of 7anuary 6, 2004. The inspector went out to the property on 3anuary 6. The house was secure and the garage was still open. A boarding order was issued to the contractor. The contractor went out on 7anuary 8 and secured the garage. As for the sidewalk, a summary abatement was issued, it was mailed on December 31 with a compliance date of January 6. It was still icy when the inspector went back. Parks went out on January 7. Ms. Henderson said Delores is at school, and Ms. Henderson takes caze of the property. There was no boarding by the garage. They were renovating it and it is not finished. The house is being sold. A new garage door was put there. They got a bill for $83.50. 3vIs. Moermond stated the door on the west side of the garage was open to enhy and needed to be secure. It was for $13.50 plus the service £ees. It was minor. Ivls. Henderson staTed she is not always in that property. She works in Saint Paul, but lives in Mendota Heights. Delores said that she received notice at her address in Atlanta, Georgia In answer to a question, Mr. Magner responded there was a vacant buiiding registration from Delores as the address of contact. His office added an Atlanta, Georgia address as of a couple MINLITES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING OF MAX ll, 2004 Page IS days ago. Delores responded it should have been prior to May because she received something in April. Ms. Henderson said Delores just came home this week. They don't laiow how the City got that address. Ms. Henderson does not need io look at the videotape, but she is bothered by the gazage. It is not an alley. Ms. Moermond recommends the following: J0401B - approving the assessment J0401A - reducing the total assessment from $83.50 to $1 plus the $70 service feas for a total assessment of $71. Having a building unsecured is a public nuisance, as people can get in there. When there is an open door, the City does send out a work crew. 808 Selbv Avenue (J0401A) Scott Bixby, 3030 Carey Heights Drive, Maplewood, appeared and stated he brought the property on foreclosure on December 12, 2003. There is a six month redempUon period, which ends on June 12. Legally, he cannot do much but maintain it and secure it until then. He just mowed the lawn yesterday. He cleaned up whenever he went over there. He checked the mail at the property. He paid the property taaces. He wouid have taken care of it if he had zeceived notice. It is a registered vacant building. New locks were put on the back and front doors. It has not been broken into since. The former owner committed suicide, and there are a lot of personal goods still in the property. (Mr. Bixby showed Ms. Moermond documents.) Mr. Bixby asked about the prior assessment. Ms. Moermond responded she only has one in front of her. Mr. Magner added Yhat was sent to the previous owner. The new owner will have to inherit that one. Marcia Moermond recommends deleting this assessment as the owner did noY receive proper norice of the violation. 1237 Jackson Street (30401A) (No one appeazed.) Marcia Moennond recommends approval of the assessment. 1972 Nokomis Avenue (JOAOlA) (No one appeared.) Marcia Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. o m � � ; � � A � m n �\ � � � � \� .' `J � � �l � � I�INI � � z e { G y � c � ^^ Y� � t \ ` y . � � ' � ` � \ � e i \ � G �S � � � � �� 1 � \ �' � `� ('�., �, W � d m K e m � K G T ? =i 3 ¢ c a . 0 � � � e a � 11 � �t n 0 m � e� � � H 'N N T � � y � � — � p g a � w � o�+ o w � c '.] io n o. � g fn 6 (T �' � m w [9 < [n m � � rn a � � ry s ry �+ S c � � � � � , � � � � � � � � 3 a ' G o x � � z � C 3 s Q � � 0 N � ° w 3' � /� � A T' � m m Z C G O ' O Z G 1 O O O N N o � N o` O � A -R' � . a r � 0 � .� � a z 0 m x �e z � y e Z '� 3 � � �� w m n G n p K 3 c � 0 o r A ^� - � r O p A m a � t O � «� � � � m � � s > 3 � W a � c r � H1 N � � � � 3 O ao � O � 1 � � w z a c 3 � � � � x; � � �� o � �n � �° � N � o �. 0 � d � � N G. � � � a ro � a � � � b� o � � o � '] °' '� n � rz=� o< r ac -�Ka oz y <�'� � � � O zc' a � m 3 � z rn � O � 7.1 < n � 0 w a � a � � � a 0 0 N n � O s . � � "C) T � /� l�� ( V " � O � b � n m r m O P7 x 3 ro H ro � n m r � H ii cnyY nmom H n x13b O I I C H"� y ii (�] z o rnmmz li �[ II C�7 x II H 0 �] �� r II [�] i n n n n ii n n n n n +n u +�+ r n N o �� a a n n� n� w ui n o in o o n • �I o 0 0 o n o 0 0 � ro�y�o�� m� m��z � o�voc�� OCx�� zxr� �o G] �-+ O 4 � x1 � os � N H�n y C � X � o in *+ , ro � o C � K �] 'y L�] i O N X1 � �o m � t T i N O � i w i i i o � w � � � � � F, C[t�HC7 � � � . �y m � � � � i � � O ro H �-+ z � [�1 � x,rmoz � � �e � zcn mrob � � [J�t3YCJ � o � x H C C7 � [�1 i az r�+ i m ��° z ��z �� m d z�ro i � i t � ° z a i w ; � ; � � � J (� y y I �7 �dm�v � za��n C H i y �zd�o � o�z �'� � z mm<�� x�m i H I n� � m � � � 1 I I I � 1 1 1 i I i 1 � i I I I 1 i i i �� i i i � i ~ N N H O lJl M� I O O O � � 000 1 F] 000 1 [�] I h] �� oip w i ;v 1' r` O 1 4 O O O i O O O H 000iy 0 0o i fn II i � �� i H 11 �� il N I � � n � � � n o n i. L. o i �l II N N W ; Q UI p O Ili O Q II • ' • � $ o II o 00 � y O II o O O� V] O i �1 � � N n1 � � � � � O ti�ro N i L+7 � X1 n� � H � � K O � H O i C7 0 0 m � N � O a ro � r � 3 ro 0 C 3 � H x m � p z � C � H m z ro 0 4 [tl n H 4 0 w 0 C N � N � H x m N 2 � P7 � r C Y � r