Loading...
05-612Council File # � Ut\Z Green Sheet # �� RESOLUTION Presented By Referred To OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA �3 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 one and one-half story, wood frame single family dwelling located on property hereinafter 4 referred to as the "Subject Property" and commonly known as 1328 Mazgaret Street. This property is 5 legally described as follows, to wit: 6 Lot 5, Block 1, Bergman's Bivision. 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 WHEREAS, based upon the records in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and information obtained by Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement on or before January 9, 2005, the following are the now known interested or responsible parties for the Subject Property: Daniel L,abarre, 1328 Margaret Street, St. Paul, MN 55106-4723; Shelly A. Labane, 1176 Reaney Ave., St. Paul, MN 55106; Curt Bennet, Housing Response Center, 624 Selby Ave., St. Paul, MN 55104; Best & Flanagan LLP, 4000 First Bank Place , 601 - 2nd Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55402; Wilford & Geske, Lawrence A. Wilford, James A. Geske, 7650 Cuneil Blvd., Ste. 300, Woodbury, MN 55125 WHEREAS, Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has served in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paui Legislalive Code an order identified as an "Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s)" dated Apri125, 2005; and WHEREAS, this order informed the then lmown interested or responsible parties that the structure located on the Subject Property is a nuisance building(s) pursuant to Chapter 45; and WHEREAS, this order informed the interested or responsible parties that they must repair or demolish the structure located on the Subject Property by May 25, 2005; and WHEREAS, the enforcement officer has posted a placazd on the Subject Property declaring this building(s) to constitute a nuisance condition; subject to demolition; and WHEREAS, this nuisance condition has not been corrected and Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement requested that the City Clerk schedule public hearings before the Legislative Hearing Officer of the City Council and the Saint Paul City Council; and WHEREAS, the interested and responsible parties have been served notice in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul I.egislative Code, of the time, date, place and puipose of the public hearings; and AA-ADA-EEO Employer 1 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the L.egslative Hearing Officer of the Saint Paul C�, ►1.. 2 Council on Tuesday, June 21, 2005 to heaz testimony and evidence, and after receiving testimony and 3 evidence, made the recommendation to approve the request to order the interested or responsible parties 4 to make the Subject Property safe and not detrimental to the public peace, health, safety and welfare and 5 remove its blighting influence on the community by rehabilitaUng this structure in accordance with all 6 applicable codes and ordinances, or in the altemative by demolishing and removing the structure in 7 accordance with ali appiicable codes and ordinances. The rehabilitation or demolition 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 4d 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 WHEREAS, a hearing was held before the Saint Paul City Council on Wednesday, July 6, 2005 and the testimony and evidence including the action taken by the Legislative Hearing Officer was considered by the Council; now therefore BE TI' 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 1328 Mazgaret Street: That the Subject Property comprises a nuisance condition as defined in Saint 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,OOQ.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 correct the deficiencies or to demolish and remove the building(s). That the deficiencies causing this nuisance condition have not been wrrected. 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. •'� � The Saint Paul City Council hereby makes the following order: 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 conecting all deficiencies as prescribed in the above referenced Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) in accordance with all applicable codes and ozdinances, 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 � 7 10 11 12 pS-l��Z 2. If the above corrective action is not completed within this period of time Neighborhood Aousing & Property Improvement is hereby authorized to take whatever steps aze necessary to demolish and remove this structure, fill the site and charge the costs incurred against the Subject Property pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul I.egislative Code. 3. In the event the building is to be demolished and removed by the City of Saint Paul, all personal property or fixtures of any kind which interfere with the demolition and removal shall be removed from the property by the responsible parties by the end of this time period. If all personal property is not removed, it shall be considered to be abandoned and the City of Saint Paul shall remove and dispose of such property as provided by law. 4. It is further ordered, that a copy of this resolution be mailed to the owners and interested parties in accordance with Chapter 45 of the Saint Paul I.egislative Code. xequested by Department of: Benanav Montaomerv Bostrom ThL Hax Lar. He1 AdoF Ado� By: Appx By: Yeas Navs ✓ ✓ Absent Nei hborh d Housin Pro ert Im rovement ✓ � 1 (� Bv: � � �l 1 AA-ADA-EEO Employer � Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � f�._/_l7 DepaNnenUotfice/counai: Date Initiated: �,J� `+�a v NH -���H�� �-,�Y� Green Sheet NO: 3026617 C�� P &��. . Deoar6neM Serrt To Person InitiailDate Mdy Dawkins � 0 r o" �"�� /lasign I hood ou ' r D � Director �'"� S Must Be on Council Aeenda by (Date): Number 2 puo G 3 O6JUL-05 For Routing 3 a or's Of6ce M or/Assistan[ prd�y 4 onn'1 5 CI r Ci Clerk Total # of Signature Pages _(Clip All Locafions for Signature) Action Requestetl: Ciry Council to pass t}us resolution wluch will order the owner(s) to remove or repair the referenced building(s). If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, the Neighborhood Housing and Properry Improvement is ordered to remove the building. The subject property is located at 1328 Mazgazet Street. Recommendations: Approve (A) or Reject (R): Personal Service Contrects Must Mswer the Following Questions: Planning Commission 1. Has this persorrffirm ever waked urWw a contract for this department? qB Canmiltee Yes No Civil Service Commission 2. Has this personffirtn ever been a city ernployee? Yes No 3. Does this peisoNfirm possess a skill not namally possessed by any ' curreM city employee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet Initiating Probiem, 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 deSned in Chapter 43 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code. The owners, interested pazties and responsible parties known to ihe Enforcement Officer were given an order to repair or remove the building at 1328 Mazgaret Street by May 25, 2005, and have failed to comply with those orders. AdvaMa9es If Mproved: The City will eliminate a nuisance. 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 properry taxes. Disadvarka�es If Not Approved: A nuisance condition will remain unabated in the Ciry. This building(s) will continue to blight the community. ToWI Amount of . -'" � - - - - 9 Trensaction: $OOO CosGRevenue Bud eted: � Y ' - - -` � �'-� � � � Funding Source: NUiSanCe HOUSiftg � '���� 1 Financialinformation: Ab8tef118f1t JUBB Q J 20o 3 (Explain) os' ���:d � ���� ���� ���o���� NE[GHSORHOOD HOUSING & PROPERTY L�IPROVEMENT Andy Dawk�ns, Pragram M¢nagr� ti� , CTTI' OF SAIlVT PAUL Nuisar.ce Bui(ding Code Enfo�remertt RandyC.Ke((y,Mayor 1600Nortl�lYhiteBrarAvenue Tel: 651-?66-]900 Saint Pau[, bLV Si106 Fac 651-266-1926 May 27, 2005 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Council President and Members of the City Council Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement , Vacant/Nuisance Huildings Enforcement Division has requested the City Council schedule public hearings to consider a resolution ordering the repair or removal of the nuisance building(s) located at: 1328 MargaretStreet The City Council has scheduled the date of these hearings as follows: Legislative Hearing - Tuesday, June 21, 2005 City Councii Hearing - Wednesday July 6, 200� The owners and responsible parties of record are: Name and Last Known Address Daniel Labarre 1328 Mar�azet Sueet St. Paul, MN 55106-4723 Shelly A. Labarre 1176 Reaney Ave. St. Paul, MN 55106 Curt Bennet Housing Response Center 624 Selby Ave. St. Paul, MN 55104 Best & Flanagan LLP 4000 First Bank Place 601 - 2°d Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55402 Wilford & Geske, L.awrence A. Wilford, James A. Geske 7650 Currell Blvd., Ste. 300 Woodbury, MN 55125 AA-ADA-EEO Employer Interest Fee Owner Fee Owner Atty. for Mortgage Co. Atty. for Mo rtgage Co. ��4.'-'�� ��r_c,.ap^' �A:: _ �:;; J��3 7 Z011S �,�,_� � rr. - _, '"'"@.. 2 c�-�cZ 1328 Margaret Street May 27, 200� Page 2 The leQal dzscript:on of this property is: Lot 5, Block 1, Be aaman's Division. Nei�hborhood Housing & Property Improvement has declared this buildino(s) to constitute a "nuisance" as defined by I.ea slative Code, Chapter 45. Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement has issued an order to the then known responsible parties to eliminate this nuisance coadition by correcting the deficiencies or by razing and removing this building(s). Inasmuch as this Order to Abate has not been complied with the nuisance condition remains unabated, the community continues to suffer the blighting influence of this property. It is the recommendation of the Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement that the City Councii pass a reso]ution ordering the responsible parties to either repair, or demolish and remove this building in a timely manner, and failing that, authorize the Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement to proceed to demolition and removal, and to assess the costs incurred against the real estate as a special assessment to be collected in the same manner as taaces. Sincerely, 10 , , �� , Steve Ma�ner Vacant Buildings Supervisor Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement SM:mI cc: Frank Berg, Building Inspection and Design Judy Hanson, City Attomeys Office MaryErickson, Assistant Secretary to the Council L,aurie Kaplan, PED-Housing Division crnph AA-ADA-EEO Emplayer � c«'. :E:. ::6;-.:" . =� _ ��=_- 1 � c�5-��Z NIIN[JTES OF THE LEGISLAT'IVE HEARING ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIlt, CONDEMNATIONS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS, ABATEMENT ORDERS, RENTAL REVOCATION CERTIFICATES Tuesday, June 21, 2005 Room 330, 15 Kellogg Boulevard West Mazcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer The hearing was calIed to order at 10:02 a.m. STAFF PRESENT: John Betz, Neighborhood Housing and Properry Improvement (NHI'n; Katherine Lor, Human Resources; Steve Magner, NHPI; Racquel Naylor, City Council Offices Laid over summary abatements: J0502A Properly cleanup at 1255 Ashland Avenue; JOSOlA Property cleanup at 971 Earl Street; J0502A Property cleanup at 971 Earl Street; J0502A Property cleanup at 1783 Marvland Avenue East; JOSOlA Property cieanup at 2168 Minnehaha Avenue East; J0502A Properly cleanup at 1548 Van Buren Avenue; JOSOIA Properly cleanup at 195 White Bear Avenue North. 971 Earl Street (JOSOlA, J0502A� Norma Abad, owner, 4456 Woodgate Point, Eagan, appeazed. Regarding JOSOlA, John Betz reported orders were issued to remove items by 1-17-05. The reinspection was on 1-19-05. A wark order was sent to Pazks who removed the above items on 1-24-05. For J0502A, orders were mailed on 1-13-OS to remove snow and ice on public sidewallc and to comply by 2-2-05. A work order was sent to Pazks who shoveled the walks on 2-Z-O5. Ms. Abad stated notices did not get to her: they were sent to 971 Earl, but she does not live there. She has a tenanf there. Ms. Abad had given a forwarding address a year ago. Mr. Betz stated original notices were sent to TCF and to the occupant. Ms. Abad responded TCF was the owner a couple of years ago. She bought the property in 2003. The County has not updated the paperwork from the title company. Ms. Moermond asked is there anytl�ing for rental registration and Mr. Betz responded he does not. Ms. Abad responded tlus is a rental property. Ms. Moermond asked did the occupant let Ms. Abad lrnow these notices had come. A month later, responded Ms. Abad. She never saw the notices herself. Mr. Betz sTated he has an ownership in 2004 of a Fernandez as a taaz owner. Ms. Abad responded that was the previous owner. The property was in foreclosure and TCF was the seller. c�-��a LEGISLATIVE HEARING IvIINLTTES OF JLJNE 21, 2005 Page 2 (A videotape was shown.) From the videotape, said Ms. Moermond, it looked like a closed freezer. (The videotape was shown again.) Ms. Abad stated that freezer was not hers. The only thiug that was hers was the mattress. Ms. Moermond responded she is flexible in listening to ail kinds of situations, but she is inflexible with refrigerators and freezers being left with their door unsecured. She saw no bolt and no door removed. As faz as she is concerned, the City should have gone there within 24 hours. It is especially dangerous in the winter when kids make things like snow forts. Also, this should have been registered as a rental property. Ms. Abad responded it was not the purpose to rent it; it was going to be sold on a contract-for-deed, the person backed out, and these tenants came at the last minute. Ms. Moermond stated it was bought in 2003 and these violations were in 2005. More than a yeaz lapsed from the fime she purchased it to get it registered as a rental property. Ms. Moermond recognized Ms. Abad did not get the notice at her mailing address, but it was partly Ms. Abad's fault. If it was registered as a rental property, she would have gotten the notice. Ms. Moermond is willing to give a break on the snow emergency, but not the cleanup. Ms. Abad stated she wiil be filing an unlawful detainer on the tenant and asked could her tenant look at the videotape. Mr. Betz responded that she could contact him. Ms. Moermond recommends the following: JOSOlA — approval of the assessment because the freezer door was still intact. J0502A - reducing the assessment from $220 to $110 for the snow and ice removal because the owner did not receive proper notice. 1255 Ashland Avenue Racquel Naylor said the owner requested that this be laid over to June 28. Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the June 28 Legislative Hearing. 2168 Minnehaha Avenue East Racquel Naylor said the owner requested that this be laid over to June 28. Ms. Moermond recommends laying over to the June 28 Legislafive Hearing. 195 White Bear Avenue North (A videotape was shown.) o5-�►a LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUT`ES OF JIJNE 21, 2005 Page 3 Ms. Moermond recommends approval of the assessment. The owner requested additional time at a previous hearing to hire a proper landscaper. Mr. Betz added that trees overhanging public sidewalk is a problem for blind people. Referred back to Legislative Hearing J0403V Towiug of abandoned vehicle from 832 Englewood Avenue. (Note: 'I`his assessment has already been approved by City Council. It was referred back to a Legisiative Hearing by Councilmember Montgomery.) (Katherine Lor provided English-Hmong interpretation for this address.) The following appeazed: Youa Xiong and Heu Vang, owners. John Betz reported he does not haue a file for this property. Ms. Moermond explained that the translator is a City employee and is not here to represent them. Ms. Vang said tt�at the reason they do not want to pay for the assessment because the garbage belonged to the previous owner, who did not have a place to rent and then rented from them. Ms. Vang told him to clean it up, but it was the City that cleaned it up. They evicted the tenant in December. Ms. Moermond stated the vehicles and the conditions are the responsibilities of the property owner. It is $409 for the blue Toyota and storing it for two weeks. Ms. Lor responded that the owners mentioned gazbage. Ms. Moermond responded there may be other assessments. This sounds like a legal situation between them and the former renter. Ms. Moermond has to balance how much is the owner's responsibility and how much is the taxpayers' responsibilities. She will reduce this assessment to $300. Mr. Xiong wonders why the previous owner was not called to do the clean up. Ms. Moermond responded she does not know that is the case. The owners said they will be willing to pay for this if Ms. Moermond would give them documentarion that if they become renters, they aze not responsible for keeping the property. Ms. Moermond responded she is not empowered to give any such document. If the owner improves the property, the value goes up. Then the appreciation and value goes into their pocket. They allowed the previous owner to stay here. Ms. Moermond recommends reducing this assessment from $409 to $300 and making the payments over three years. (A resolution will be prepazed to reduce this assessment.) a�-61� LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINI7TES OF JIJNE 21, 2005 Page 4 Appeal of Vacant Building Registration Notice at 1131 Pavne Avenue; owner: Regina R. Mejia for Want 2B Nice Properties III. (NHPn (Rescheduled from 6-7-OS) Matt Mejia, owner, 1200 Forest Street, appeared and stated the property is owned by Old Treasure Rea1 Estate; Want 2B Nice is the holding company. The tenant was dealing drugs, so Mr. Mejia was contacted by one of the City officers. Mr. Mejia kicked out the tenant and received a Revocation of Rental License after that. He talked to Andy (Dawldns, NHPn, who was going to give him a certain amount of time to get the repairs done. Then he got the Vacant Building Nofice. He got the guy out like the City asked him to and the other unit was unoccupied. He knows the building needs works. Ms. Moermond asked is this a Category II Vacant Building. Steve Magner responded yes and Lisa Martin (NHPI) referred it over to him. Inspector Singerhouse found the property did not meet the criteria of the ordinance. He mailed the registration notice to the owner and a letter indicating the property was going to require a Code Compliance Inspection. Mr. Dawkins gaue Mr. Magner a document indicating the property owner should evict the tenant. This was signed by the appellant Regina Mejia. Also, there is a serious electrical issue at the property: there is a minimum b0 amp service. If it is serving both units, that allows for 30 amps per unit, which does not meet the minimum requirement for housing in the City. The building could be condemned on that, but a condemnation is a tool used to vacate a dwelling. His opinion is that the owners need a Code Compliance Inspection on this property and a certificate issued. Mr. Mejia said he does not disagree with Mr. Magner. That is one of the reasons why they needed to have both tenants out; it is not easy to do electrical when one or both units are occupied. Mr. Mejia's issue is that the Level II Code Compliance is significant. That was not his understanding of the agreement with Mr. Dawkins. One of the things they needed to do is the electrical upgrade. It also needs a roof and windows. Mr. Mejia just does not think it warrants a Level II Inspection. Ms. Moerond asked were there any notes in the file about his conversation with Mr. Dawkins. Mr. Magner responded the only thing he has is this document. Ms. Moermond looked at the documents provided by Mr. Magner and said it clearly states that Mr. Mejia understood the violations needed to be corrected before the building is reoccupied and those violations would be determined by an intemai and external inspection of the property. It is straightforward. Ms. Moermond asked when he would do the repairs. Mr. Mejia responded he needs to refinance the property because there is $50,000 worth of work to be done. It should be done by the end of summer. Ms. Moermond stated she cannot give him much on this. This is clean cut and should be a vacant building registration. She hears he had an interacrion with Mr. Dawkins that left him LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINiJTES OF JiJNE 21, 2005 � �e.,M S� O ���Z Page 5 under a different impression. She can give him a break on the Rental Registration Fees and arrange for the fees to be delayed until September 30. The agreement looks cleaz. Mr. Magner clarified that Ms. Moermond is requiring the Code Compliance Inspection and the Code Compliance Certificate before occupancy and she is holdiug the fee for four months. He asked that the registration form still be submitted. At the end of four months, the fees would be required. Ms. Moermond responded that is coaect. Mr. Mejia responded this recommendation is fair. In sununary, Ms. Moermond recommends withholding the Vacant Building Registration Fees until September 30, 2005. If the work is done by then, the fee will not be required. � Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 13Z8 Marearet Street. If the owner fails to compIy with the resolution, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement is ordered to remove the building. Dan Labarre, owner, appeared. Steve Magner reported this building was condemned on 9-24-04 and has been vacant since 10-13-04. Seven suuunary abatement notices haue been issued for several violations. On 4-12-05, an inspecfion 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 4-25-OS with a compliance date of 5-25-05. As of this date, this properiy remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The Vacant Building Fees and real estate taxes have been paid. Taxation has placed an estimated market value of $35,400 on the land and $105,300 on the building. There was a Code Compliance Inspection done on 11-9-04, and a bond was posted on 4-27-05. Code Enforcement Officers estimate the cost to repair is $50,000 to $60,000. The estimated cost to demolish is $7,000 to $8,000. There are still ongoing police activities at the property. They have monitored this property repeatedly for illegal occupancy by Mr. Labarre and two others who say they know him. Mr. LaBarre has gone to court from being been tagged for illegal occupancy. In answer to several questions, Mr. Magner responded almost all of the Sununary Abates Orders have gone to work orders. There were a number of snow and ice issues, tall grass and weeds, and garbage. The City has only been dealing with this since 10-13-04. One permit was cancelled because he needed to pull a bond. The City has not been called back to do inspecrions. The owner recently purchased the house out of foreclosure. Ms. Moermond asked the owner what he intends to do with this building. Mr. Labarre responded to get it up to code. He has been doing work on the inside and maintaining the grass. He posted the $2,000 a couple of months ago and has some friends that will help him out with getting a loan through Dayton's Bluff for the roof. There are some things he can do from the list. �5-�1� LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINUTES OF JCJNE 21, 2005 Page 6 Ms. Moermond asked where he is with the cruuinal citation issue. Ms. Labarre responded the prosecuting attomey said that he has to do 15 days with time served; he already completed five. There were a few tags written. The cops came on Memorial Day and said he was not supposed to be there, yet the prosecuting attomey said that he could. Ms. Moermond asked about the condemnation. Mr. Magner responded he does recall tt�at there were interior maintenance repairs. There was an open junction box and exposed wiring. If he is looking for obtaining a loan to do the roof and other thixigs, the 50% threshold will not have been made by the tnne the approval goes through. Mr. Magner does not want him to lose his bond. Ms. Moermond recoxnmends that the owner do the following by noon of July 6: 1) Provide a work Plan indicating how a11 the items on the Code Compliance Inspection Report will be completed, 2) Provide a financial plan indicating the wherewithal to execute the work plan, 3) maintain the exterior of the property, and 4) no future police calls for illegal occupancy. The work plan needs to be approved by Steve Magner and Ms. Moermond. Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 647 York Avenue. If the owner fails to comply with the resolution, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement is ordered to remove tbe building. Susan Strombeck, owner, appeared. Steve Magner reported that this building was condemned on 1-12-04 and has been vacant since then. The owner is Susan Strombeck. There have been two summary abatement notices to cut tall grass. On 3-2-05, an inspection of the building was conducted, a list of deficiencies which constitute a nuisance condition was developed, and photographs were taken. An Order to Abate Nuisance Building was issued on 4-25-OS with a compliance date of 5-25-05. As of this date, this property remains in a condition which comprises a nuisance as defined by the legislative code. The Vacant Building Registration Fees are due, and the real estate t�es are unpaid in the amount of $3,406.42. Taxation has placed an estimated mazket value of $5,000 on the land and $207,500 on the building. As of 6-21-05, a code Compliance Inspection has not been applied for. On 1-7-04, Fire completed a Code Compliance Inspection. As of 6-21-05, a$2,000 bond has not been posted. Minimum repairs are estimated at $150,000 and the estimated cost to demolish is $25,000 to $27,000. Ms. Strombeck stated she plans to rehabilitate the property and will be getting a loan to do that. There aze two floors and a basement. She wants to live there and rent out one space. She bought the building in 1995, and she was out of work for a long time due to an accident. Ms. Moermond asked for information on the condemnation. Mr. Magner responded they do not have a team inspection, but the condemnation is dated 1-24-04. There is no heat in the building along with severe water damage. Mr. Strombeck responded there was a breakage in the pipes that go to the radiators caused by a water main that broke in the street. Z� LEGISLATIVE HEARING MINLTTES OF .T[TNE 21, 2005 Page 7 Ms. Moermond stated there is a lack of basic facilities: gas, electric, and water. The City has boarded up the properiy. Ms. Moermond recommends the following is done by noon of July 6: 1) A Code Compliance Inspection Report conducted, 2) a work�plan to address all the items on the Code Compliance Inspection, 3) maintain the exterior of property, 4) pay the Real Estate taxes, 5) pay the Vacant Buildiag fees, 6) Provide a financial plan showing the owner has the financial capacity to execute the work plan, and 7) post the $2,000 bond and pull permits. The owner is in danger of losing this building. Appeal of Summary Abatement Order at 646 Fuller Avenue; owner: Richard A Bowen. (NI3PI) Richazd Bowen, owner, appeared. John Betz issued a Correction Notice about a 55 gallon metal dnun full of rubbish near the gazage, a pile of firewood or tree logs, and a metal cabinet. Richazd Bowen reported his notice said nothing about tree logs. It mentioned a metal cabinet, a pine tree, tree debris in the yazd, and a metal drum. The pine tree was an artificial Christmas tree someone gave him, wtrich was moved to the basement. He and his neigJ�bor both received notices to cut down trees. He made tlu�ee trips to the recycling. He didn't do anything about the 55 metal dnun neaz the alley, as it has been there since 1979. People going through the alley toss things into the barrel. It never overflows, so he does not see it as a nuisance. It is a benefit to the alley. The metal cabinet is on the patio. He has put a lot of work onto the house by installing a new roof and a retauring wall. The metal cabinet is not a nuisance, and the tree logs were all picked up. When asked what he is looking for, Mr. Bowen responded he would like to not leave the 55 gallon drug and the metal cabinet. They do not fit the definition of a nuisance. As far the wood, he does not have tree logs. (Ms. Moermond viewed photographs supplied by Mr. Betz.) Ms. Moermond responded she is looking at a photograph of a pile of wood. Mr. Bowen responded it is up to statute and off the ground. Mr. Betz responded it is right next to an occupied structure. Mr. Bowen stated no one told him to remove the fire wood. The pile has been there for years. He has a fireplace. Ms. Moermond asked the date of the original Conection Notice. Mr. Betz responded May 18 with a compliance date of May 30. �5-�l � LEGISLATIVE HEARING MIN UTES OF JUNE 21, 2005 Page 8 What is the problem with the tool cabinet exterior storage, asked Ms. Moermond. Mr. Betz responded it may not fit the definition of nuisance. Rather, it may fit the definition of eaterior storage which would be more applicably addressed with the criminal violation tag as opposed to a nuisance abatement condition. He does not see notes of a conversation. He has a notice that says tree logs. Ms. Moermond stated the wood pile cannot be stored that close to the house. That is easy to fix. She asked is the metal cabinet rusting. No, responded Mr. Bowen, and he has it there while he is remodeling. In answer to questions about the barrel, Mr. Bowen responded there are no holes in it. People use it. He goes in other alleys and there is glass all over the place. He thinks he is doing something that benefits the neighborhood and does not see it as a nuisance. He does not always totally empty it, but it is never overflowing. Mr. Betz stated his understanding is that the barrel has concrete, broken glass, and refuse. The City puts out barrels and the contents aze removed so there are no problems with flies, or vermin to breed within the container especially if there is no cover. In 26 yeazs, said Mr. Bowen, he has never found food, vermin, nor flies. Ms. Moermond stated three weeks from today is a good fime to remove the firewood pile. Mr. Bowen should take a Neighborhood Nuisance Handbook which has a section on fire wood. As for the tool storage, it is not a building like a shed, so it is not okay exterior storage. She can see it is useful; however, the gazage is where most people have this kind of thing. He has until September 30 to find a place for it. A piece of furniture cannot be stored outside. Mr. Bowen stated he does not understand why this is the case when lawn fumiture is fine. The City does not allow storage of materials in exterior azeas in Chapter 34, responded Mr. Betz. Lawn furniture is used in the capacity of enjoying the outdoors. In summary, Ms. Moermond's recommendarions aze as follows: Tree Logs — appeal denied and should be moved by July 12, 2005; Metal cabinet - appeal demed and should be moved by October 31, 2005; Barrel — appeal granted and the barrel can stay there indefinitely as long as it is emptied once a week. The hearing was adjoumed at 11:55 am. r�u