04-852Council File # O ( � ���
Green Sheet # 3021477
RESOLUT{ON
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINtVESOTA
37
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, single family dwelling and the detached, two-stall, wood frame
4 gazage located on property hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property" and commonly known as 79
5 Atwater Street. This property is legally described as follows, to wit:
6
7
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
I,ot 19, Block 5, I.ewis' Addirion to St. Paul.
WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information
obtained by Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement on or before February 29, 2004, the
following are the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Yang Properties
LLC, 7557 Upper 24`� St., St. Paul, MN 55128-5025; Harold T. Wylie & Lois Mae v. Wylie, 2556 Spruce
St., Litfle Canada, MN 55117-1419; University National Bank, 200 University Ave W, St. Paul, MN
55103
WHEREAS, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has served in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul i.egislative Code an arder identified as an "Order to Abate
Nuisance Building(s)" dated June 2, 2004; and
WHEREAS, this arder 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
WFIEREAS, this arder informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or
demolish the structure located on the Subject Property by July 2, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placard on the Subject Property declaring this
building(s) to constitute a nuisance condiUOn; subject to demolition; and
WHEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Neighborhood Housing &
Property Impxovement requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Lzgislative
Hearing Officer of the City Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and
WFIEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Pau] Legislative Code, of the time, date, place and purpose of the
public hearings; and ,
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
oy- �sa
1 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul City
2 Council on Tuesday, August 24, 2004 to hear testimony and evidence, and after receiving testimony and
3 evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible parties to
4 make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and
5 remove its biighting influence on the community by rehabilitating this structure in accordance with all
6 applicable codes and ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the shucture in
7 accordance with all applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolirion of the structure to
8 be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing; and
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, September 1,
2004 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the L.egslative Hearing Officer was
considered by the Council; now therefore
BE TT RESOLVED, that based upon the testimony and evidence presented at the above referenced
public hearings, the Saint Paul City Council hereby adopts the following Findings and Order concerning
the Subject Property at 79 Atwater Street:
That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in 5aint Paul
I.egislative Code, Chapter 45.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
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 known responsible
parties to co�rect the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s).
That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been conected.
That Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has posted a placard on the Subject
Property which declares it to be a nuisance condition subject to demolition.
That this building has been routinely monitored by Neighborhood Housing & Property
Improvement, 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 Subject Property safe and not
detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and remove its blighting influence on the
community by rehabilitating this structure and correcting a11 deficiencies as prescribed in the above
referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accordance with all applicabie codes and
ordinances, or in the alternative by demolishing and removing the structure in accordance with all
applicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition and removal of the structure
must be completed within fifteen (15) days after the date of the Council Hearing.
AA-ADA-EEO Employer
o y- 8s�
1 2. If the above corrective action is not completed within this period of time Neighborhood Housing &
2 Property Improvement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps are necessary to demolish and
3 remove this structure, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject Property
4 pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislauve Code.
5
6 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, a11 personal
7 property or fixtwes of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed
8 from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If ail personal property
9 is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shall remove and
10 dispose of such property as provided by law.
11
12 4. It is further ordered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to the owners and interested parties in
13 accardance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code.
Yeas Navs Absent
Benanav �
Montaomerv �
Bost_rom . _
ThU
Has
Lar,
Hel
Adop
Adop
By:
Appr
By:
Requested by Department of:
AA-ADA-EEO 6mployer
Nei hborho 3 Housin Pro�ert Im rovement
BY. (� ,
� Green Sheet Green Sheet
o�- �s�
Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet
�
DepartnenUoffice/council: Date Initiated:
NH - NeighborhoodHousing/Propesty ��-���-04 � Green Sheet NO: 3021477
Coniact Person & Phone: Deoartm�rt S�tSO P�son lnitiaUDate
Mdy Dawltins � 0 hood o �
266-�92� Assign 1 Lood o' o arnnentDirector ^ /�C ' l t _� d- �1
Must Be on Councii Agenda by(Date): Number y �d�B G��
01-SEP-04 FO�
Routing 3 vor's Office Mavor/ASSistant
Oftler 4 mcil
5 i Clerk Ci Clerk
Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip NI Locations for Signature)
Action Requested:
City Council to pass Uus resoluflon which will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to
comply with the resoluUOn, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement is ordered to remove the building. The subject property
is located at 79 Atwater Street.
Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contracts Must Answer the Following Questions:
Planning Commission 1. Has this person/firm ever worked under a contract for this department?
CIB Committee Yes No
Civil Service Commission 2. Has this person/firm ever been a ciry employee? ,
Yes No
3. Does this personffirm possess a skill not normally possessed by any
current city employee?
Yes No
F�cplain afl yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Where, Why):
This building(s) is a nuisance building(s) as defined in Chapter 45 and a vacant building as defined in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paul
Legislative Code. The owners, interested parties and responsible parties known to the Enforcement Officer were given an order to
repair or remove the building at 79 Atwater Street by July 2, 2004, and have failed to comply with those orders.
AdvantageslfApproved:
The City will eliminate a nuisance. AUG o 6�[���j
Disadvantages If Approved:
The City will spend funds to wreck and remove this building(s). These costs will be assessed to the property, collected as a special
assessment against the property tases.
DisativanWges If Not Approved:
A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the City. This building(s) will continue to blight the community.
Total Amount of
Trensaction: $000 CostlRevenue Butlgetetl: y
Funainysource: Nuisance Housing ActivitVNUmber: 30251 .� F�2S4�?�rt'' �•°-����
Financiallnformation: AbHt2m8flt
(ExPlain) RI!(� 4 � aff1E14
Ut� CiJeB$
Oy- $S�
DNISION OF PROPERTY CODE ENFORCEMENT
Andy Dawkins, Program Mnrsager
CIT'I' OF SAINT PAUL ��'uirartce Buildirsg Code Enjorcemerst
Randy C. Kelly, May�or f b00 Nanh Y.`h:te Bear Avenue Tel: bif-266-1900
Saine Paul, bIN 5�106 Fax: 65L266-1926
July 30, 2004
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
�' +R ,� a,^rrh r.,.__�.
va�'.i��- --'
Council President and
Members of the City Council
��� � 6 2�Q�
Neighborhood Housin� & Property Improvement , VacantRv�uisance Buildin�s Enforcement
Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution
orderin� the repair or removal of the nuisance buiidin�(s) located at:
79 Atwater Street
The Ciry Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows:
Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, August 24, 2004
City Council Hearing -��ednesday, September 1, 2004
The owners and responsible parties of record are:
Name and Last Known Address
Yang Properties LLC
7557 Upper 24�' St.
St. Pani, MI�; >5128-5025
Haroid T. Wylie & Lois Mae v. Wylie
2556 Spruce St.
Little Canada NIIv 55117-1419
liniversiry National Bank
200 liniversin• Ace �Z"
�L �.i _'+2ti `: i C}3
- .._-..,, :-.; : � , ,
I.oi 19_ B}ock 5, Z.ewv' ?.ddition to SL Pavl.
Interest
Fee Owner
Homesteader
Hoider of Mortsase
.sa-.ww-go rsrob,n
oy - 85 �-
79 Atwater Street
July 30, 2004
Pa�e 2
Nei�hborhood Housin� & Property Improvement has declared this buildins(s) to constitute a
"nuisance" as defined by Le� slative Code, Chapter 45. 1Vei�hborhood Housing & Property
Improvement has issued an order to the then known responsible parties to eliminate this nuisance
condition by correcting the deficiencies or by razing and removinJ this buildin�(s).
Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains
unabated, the community continues to suffer the blightin� influence of this property. It is the
recommendation of the Neighborhood Housin� & Properiy Improvement that the City Council
pass a resolution ordering the responsibie parties to either repair, or demolish and remove this
buildine in a timely manner, and failin� that, authorize the Neighborhood Housin� & Property
Improvement to proceed to demolition and removal, and to assess the costs incurred a�ainst the
real estate as a speciai assessment to be collected in the same manner as taxes.
Sincerely,
�e
, , �� ,
Steve Ma�er
Vacant Buildings Supervisor
Neighborhood Housin� & Property Improvement
SM:ml
cc: Frank Berg, Building Inspection and Desi�
Meghan Riley, City Attomeys Office
MaryErickson, Assistant Secretary to the Council
Laurie Kaplan, PED-Housing Division
crnph
A.�1-ADA-EEO E�tmlover
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF AUGUST 24, 2004
��� 3�1
a�- g5Z
Page 7
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 building was
issued on June 23, 2004, with a compliance date of July 23. As of this date, this property remains in a
condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The City has had to boazd
this building to secure it against trespass. The vacant buiiding fees aze due. Taxation has pTaced an
estimated mazket value of $52,500 on the land and $132,900 on the building. On June 23, a Code
Compliance Inspection was done. As of today, a$2,000 bond has not been posted. NF�PI estimates the
cost to repair is $90,000 to $100,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000.
Mr. Terbeek confinued: the basement is dug out. Temporary jacks have been instailed that the owner
was attempting to bury in cement under the siructure of the house. The two barrels (in the
photographs) were apparentiy the owner's homemade air filtration system. The house has been gutted.
Ms. Moermond stated it looks like there was a fire. Mr. Terbeek responded there was a fire. A bobcat
was rented which has become bothersome for the neighbors. He has fwo letters &om the neighbors
plus a voicemail this morning regazding the property.
Ms. Moermond stated she has received about ten calls and has been copied on the same letYers that Mr.
Terbeek received.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval and amending the resolution to repair or remove in five days.
She is concemed abont the owner's capacity to execute the rehabilitation of the property based on the
fact that he dug up the basement without any pernuts, dug up the yard with a Bobcat, and not contacted
the gas company. No pemLits have been pulled on any of the work. The City has not heard from the
owner or the mortgage holder about poten#ial rehabilitarion pians. The first item listed on the Code
Compliance Inspection Report is to "Provide an evaluaYion from a structural engineer on the
foundation," and the second item is to "Double all 2 by 6 floor joists with no. 2 D.F. for second floor.
The entire foundation appeazs to be comprised. Many of the neighbors did not want to be identified for
fear of retaliation. This person was working late at night with a Bobcat and had engaged in some
verbai aitercations with the neighbors. Mr. Terbeek added that, according to Steve Magner (NHPn, the
air filtration system wouid bring about a mold problem in the house.
� Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the buitding(s) at 79 Atwater Street. If the
owner fails to compiy with the resolution, Neighborhood Aoasing and Property Improvement is
ordered to remove the buiiding(s).
(No one appeared to represent the property. Mr. Terbeek submitted photographs.)
Mike Terbeek reported he has several pictures, some dating back a yeaz. The building was condemned
on Aprii 17, 2003 and has been vacant since Apri121. The current owner is Yang Properties per
Ramsey County Property Records and Revenue. The owner has not discussed intentions with Nf�'I.
There have been 15 snuimary abatement notices to remove refuse from yazd, cut tall grass/weeds,
secure first floor of property, secure front door, remove snow/ice. On May 25, 2004, an inspecrion of
the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed
and photographs were taken. On order to abate nuisance building was issued on June 2, 2004 with a
�� - gsZ
LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF AUGUST 2A, 2004 Page 8
compliance date of July 2. As of this date, the properry remains in a condition which comprises a
nuisance as defined by the legislative code. They have boarded the building to secure it against
trespass. The vacant building fees aze due. TaYation has placed an estimated market value of �30,000
on the land and $73,000 on the building. As of September 14, 2004 a Code Compliance Inspection has
not been applied nor a bond posted. NFiPI estimates the cost to repair is $75,000 to $100,000; the
estimated cost to demolish is $7,000 to $8,000.
Ms. Moermond asked was the informafion listed in the Order to Abate gathered through a Code
Compliance Inspection, as she does not see things enumerated in this way normally. Mr. Terbeek
responded ihat Yhis was a building deficiency inspection of unusual diligence.
Ms. Moermond recommends approval for the following reasons: the registration fees are due, a bond
has not been posted, an owner or mortgage holder are not present.
Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 596 Wells Stree� If the
owner faiis to comply with the resolution, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement is
ordered to remove the 6uilding(s).
(No one appeared to represent the properiy. Mr. Terbeek submitted photographs.)
Mike Terbeek reported the building has been vacant since August 13, 2003. The current owner is
CitiFinancial Services, Inc. A last minute phone call was received from a Kobert Moore, who
indicated that there was a purchase agreement, CiriFinancial was intending to buy the property and
have it rehabilitated. A purchase agreement was fased to N��'I. Six smnmary abatement notices were
issued to cut grassJweeds, remove debris, remove rubbish and scrap from garage, secure garage door,
remove snowlice, boazd window, resecure garage service door. On May 11, 2004, an inspection of the
building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condirion was developed, and
photographs were taken. An order to abate a nuisance building was issued on May 18, 2004, with a
compliance date of June 17. As of this date, the properry remains in a condition which comprises a
nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The City has had to board this building to secure it against
trespass. Vacant building registration fees aze due. Tasation has placed an estimated market value of
$34,300 on the land and $83,500 on the building. As ofAugust 24, 2004 a Code Compliance
Inspection has not been applied for nor a$2,000 bond posted. IVHPI estimates the cost to repair this
structure is $60,000; estimated cost to demolish, $7,000 to $8,000. There has been foreclosure
proceedings commenced against the homeowner by CityFinancial Services, which has a lien on the
property. The statutory period of redemption for this foreclosure ends on September 23, 2004.
Marcia Moermond asked has the City performed any of the summary abatement notices. Mr. Terbeek
responded the City acted on each one.
Ms. Moermond stated they have not had the buiiding inspected, they have not posted the bond, the
bank has not paid these fees, and the City has had to do maintenance on the exterior of the structure,
and the bank is now e-mailing the City. It is hazd for her to believe that the bank is now going to be a
responsible owner and make sure this is properly rehabilitated. Mr. Terbeek responded they receaved a