Loading...
06-974City of St. Paul RESOLUTION RATIF'YING ASSESSMENT AMENDED 10/18/2006 COUNCIL FILE NO. Q - � By ' �� � Eile No. SEE BELOW Assessment No. SEE�BELOW Voting Ward In the matter of the assessment of benefits, cost and expenses for � J0603E2 (8256) Summary abatement for the excessive consumption of inspection services for property code violations on 934 Hampden billed during the time period from 3anuary 30, 2006 to April 9, 2006. LAID OVER BY COUNCIL ON 9-20-06 TO 10-18-06 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 RESOL�7ED, 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 �h,� ,,,,o �i �+�i,mo„+� deleted Yeas Nays Absent Benanav � Bostrom � Harris �/ Helgen � Lantry �/ Montgomery � Thune s� / U Adopted by CounciL• Date � ��Jj/� Adoption Certified by Council Secretary BY = /A� .t�si>� Approved a�A�� e ` L3'C7� By: � Green Sheet i �t,� �- PW — �bL'eworkc Contad Person & Phone: Juan Oritz 266-8864 Must Be on Council Aaeni Doc. Type: 07HER (DOESNT FfiANY CA E-0ocumentRequired: Y Document ContaM: IGm Robi�on Confact Phone: 266-8856 Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet � �0"I� l� / �- �� 0��9�� f - LI� '10-OCT-06 � Assign Number For Routing Order Tofal # of SignaW re Pages _(Clip All Locations for Signature) �� ``, Green Sheet NO: 3033469 ��� Depar6nent SentToPerson Inih� 0 lic Wor Juan �a 1 ouocil Ma Eri n 2 rk At Council's request on 9-20-06 this item was laid over to 10-18-06, summary abatement for the excessive consump6on of inspection services for property code violarions on 934 Hampden billed during the time period from January 30, 2006 to April 9, 2006. File N� J0603E2 Recommendations: Appro�e (A) or R Planning Commission CIB Committee Citil Service Commission 1. Has this persoNfirtn e�er wurked under a contract for this deparlment? Yes No 2. Has this persor✓Timi e�er been a city employee? Yes No 3. Does this persoNfirtn possess a skill nM nortnaily possessed by any cument city empioyee? Yes No Explain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet Initiating Problem, lssues, Opportunity (Who, What, When, Wher¢, Why): Property owners or renters create a health hazard at various times fluoughout the Ciry of Saint Paul when their property is not kept up. The City is required by City code to clean up the property and chazge the property owner for tt�e cost of the clean up. Advanqges HApproved: Cost recovery programs to recover expenses for summary abatements, grass cutting, towing of abandoned vehicles, demolitions, gazbage hauling and boardings-up. DisadvantaneslfApproved: ri� ;���%�'i` -,. ' None �'��� � _ ��� � � � Disadvantages If Not Approved: If Council does not approve these charges, general fund would be required to pay the assessment. ��Transaetion: 95 Funding Source: CosURevenue Budgeted: Activity Number. Financial h�foTmation: (Expiain) � Properry owner wil] be norified of the public hearing and chazges. Ocfober 10, 2006 1:22 PM Page 1 City of St. Paul Real Estate Division Dept. of Technology & Management Serv.COUNCIL FILE NO.�����sf — �- REPORT OF COMPLETION OF ASSESSNIENT File No. SEE BELOW Assessment No. SEE BELOW Voting Ward In the matter of the assessment of benefits, cost and expenses for J0603E2 (8256) Summary abatement for the excessive consumption of inspection services for property code violations on 934 Hampden billed during the time period from January 30, 2006 to April 9, 2006. T•n3D OVER BY COUNCIL ON 9-20-06 TO 10-18-06 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 $75.00 Parks Admin Fee $ Charge-Code Enforcement $ Real Estate Service Charge $20.00 TOTAL EXPENDITURES Charge To Net Assessment $95.00 $95.00 Said Valuation and Assessment Engineer further reports that he has assessed and levied the total amount as above ascertained, to-wit: the sum of $95.00 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 Engineer, 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 ay be considered proper. .�'�� s;.� Dated l0 60 � on AnQP Assessment Enaineer �� i M N Q i O M O W � � 1 N 1 � H � � ?� C W M a I N I � � ' � a � N I 1 � N i � � O O O O 11 O� E� o 0 0 o n o i 2 � . n p� o moo n in � Q I t?t�:?N II a1 � � � ' tl} U} II � i � 11 a i n � rL O i n W F n L� U � II i � � � 11 z W i ii � �� I �' (q 1 0000 E� O O O O 1 H I O O O O l0 �G � p000 � � N � O. i O rl m a i O � xt E U i E FC E W i i m � m W i o 0 0 0 r.� E� o 0 0 0 � rG � o 0 0 0 � a�� N � O lO 0 0 �� W F� i.n t� in c� f+1 H I �` o z '� � � o i h � H � � U i w �aaa � h � � � � � � x � cn �n cn a �zzz �000 � 0.' G3 � UUU W i p £ � W i G+ FC W W Gu S+ � 2 i � 7 � F � H H H W m CL � �n cn [n U � H O � Ul Ul Ul H � a U�UUU� � z w�wwwm H a' � r.� � v � E � W �O � x � �n � �w � z z�z N w o � �-+ M '� H I w H � , � p a i`�L W ui i a a � rx �� � u � a�ozz i H (x] I �O H Q � r � 1 U � z 'rC tA - �-+ 9+ � Oar.�o a H�xmwm � w a� F a�, � 5 W z m a m i a a � F� � ,� o � + ,-� � a � .F� w�NO m � i u] a o i i �a i 4 � � i [x o �P �� �a �� �a m ti� i o ii io � z ,a r i o a i W ,y o i � S � ] W ,�-� � �� � o �C � O JtiFCW � P+ i x cC in O i ° �'a�� z�wm� H�� W 2 O r.� i zQ�a ° m o � �[�-��'a�'az � o a�wo�� N m�>x a��z� � 3� E r1 M H m w� o p� m> mrtza � i 0 0 0 o n o O O O O II O � II � o �00 II �tl U?L�+?N II a1 r� vr u v2 aaa ii � � � ii 00o ii U U U W 11 w n �>? HHH W II r� U] � U] U II FC m m m N u E !:] W W 7 II O uuuanF xscxw �� wwwmuf+ II U aaaanw FC r.G a,' ry' II h OOOOiia EFEE n P+ � W V R a F w W x W O � w � � a � September 19, 2006 Legislative Hearing 305 Bur�ess (J0608A) No one appeazed; Ms. Moermond recommended approving the assessment. 934 Ham_pden Avenue (70603E) Mr. Steven Van Houten appeared. Page 8 0�-� Mr. Betz reported that Orders were issued on July 23, 2004 to repair siding, pealing paint, missing aluminum fascia, scrap and paint boards on the north and south sides of the garage and paint the primary structure with a compliance date of September 13, 2004. Mr. Van Houten stated that he is trying to find out how he can stop the re-issuing of these Excessive Consumption charges. He hasn't been able to comply because he is restoring this property, which has been a long process. Now, they are down to bare underlayment on the structure. They keep finding more and more problems. He doesn't understand why the City is not aclaiowledging that progress is being made. Initially, they did the garage work; they got rid of the aluminum on the house; they re-did the soffit and started on the siding; they also put in new windows. He is trying to see how he can get this re-inspection thing shut-off; talking with the inspectors doesn't seem to get it done. And, it doesn't seem that the inspectors on this side talk with the building people at all. Ms. Moermond stated that this is a complicated issue. All she has in front of her is a$50.00 tax assessment, but there are outstanding Orders and there are a bunch of permits pulled at this time. She asked that a meeting be set-up with a representative from NHPI, a representative from Building and figure out a plan with firm deadlines for the clean-up of this properry. Ms Moermond asked Mr. Betz who the key inspector is for this property. Mr. Betz stated that it is Ed Smith. Mr. Van Houten stated that Mr. Steve Toensing was the Building Inspector he was working with. So, Ms. Moermond asked Ms. Birkholz to set-up a meeting with Ed Smith, Steve Toensing, Mr. Van Houten and herself for 1:30 p.m. Tuesday, September 26, 2006. Mr. Van Houten said that Steve Toensing had said they are making good progress. Ms. Moermond stated that if a Work Plan can be worked out next Tuesday, September 26, 2006, she will delete the assessment. 15 East Jessamine (70603E) No one appeared; Ms. Moermond recommended approving the assessment. 537 Mount Curve Resolution ordering the owner to remove or repair the building(s) at 537 Mt. Curve Boulevard. Tf the owner fails to comply with the resolufion, Neighborhood Housing and Property Improvement (NAPn is ordered to remove the building. (Laid over from September 5.) Olo• t1� MINUT`ES OF THE LEGISLATIVE HEARING ORDERS TO REMOVE/REPAIR, CONDEMNATIONS, ABATEMENT ASSESSMENTS, ABATEMENT ORDERS, RENTAL REVOCATION CERTIFICATES Tuesday, September 26, 2006 Room 330 Ciry Hall, 15 Kellogg Boulevard West Mazcia Moermond, Legislative Hearing Officer The hearing was called to order at 130 p.m. Staff Present: Paula Seeley, Neighborhood Housing and Properry Improvement (NHPI); David Palm, City Attorney's Office; Appeal of Steven Van Houten for an E%cessive Consumption charge at 934 Hamnden Avenue. (Rescheduled from 10:00 a.m. Tuesday, September 19, 2006.) Ms. Moermond stated that at the last hearing, they had talked about a tas assessment for Excessive Consumption of Code Enforcement Services. She understood from the Ward office (Jay Benenav and Jane Prince) as well, that perhaps there had been some miscommunicarion to Mr. Van Houten from Building officials versus Code Enforcement officials. There is this tax assessment and perhaps some to be forthcoming. Mr. Van Houten added that now he has a Court Order, related to the same thing. Ms. Moermond noted that this criminal citation changes her idea about working something out through discussion. Mr. Palm has agreed that if a workable plan can be developed to get this fixed, there's a possibility the plan could be brought into court as a settlement for the criminal citation. In other words, Mr. Van Houten might be able to accomplish two (2) goals today if he is willing to commit to getting some of this work done in a particular time frame. The Ward office has worked with both the Building officiai and the Code Enforcement official, and they will support Mr. Palm and Ms. Moermond's recommendation from this hearing, sight unseen. The Building officials have decided not to own this anymore; iYs now in the hands of Code Enforcement. Both the City Council and the District Council have received numerous complaints about the condirion of the property. Ms. Moermond has seen photographs and also the reports. She asked Mr. Van Houten about his plans. Mr. Houten responded that it has been an on-going problem. The first building permit he received was in 2004. They (he and his wife) had a lot of problems with the aluminum fascia that was deteriorating. They took off a front porch that was falling apart. The property was in bad shape when they bought it, and they kept finding more and more problems. The worst thing was that when they took off some siding to fix a window problem, they found some rim joist issues. Apparently, some previous owner had poured sidewalk above the level of the foundation. They acquired the property in 1997, and have been working on it ever since. There were some family problems that needed to deal with, as well. The main work on the building started in 2004. A required paint job turned into a nightmare. They couldn't get anyone to bid on the job the way it needed to be done. It had been a shingled properiy and no one wanted to touch it because it was such a big job, so they started it themselves. They kept fmding more and more rotten places as they proceeded. They finally decided to take off the siding (tbree layers), revealing a lot of window issues that had been covered up with aluminuxn. It was a bad cover-up job and so everything underneath was rotting. Now, they are in the process of getting all the historic windows to work. The house was built around 1901, and iYs had a hard life. Unfortunately, iYs located in an area that is trying to go upscale. They have a mortgage with some equity. September 26, 2006 Minutes of the Legislative Hearing �L.- q, Page 2 Ms. Moermond noted the huge undertaking of this project and suggested that it was time to call in professionals. Mr. Van Houten responded that they have done some of that, and iYs been a nightmare. They have been hying to find a good contractor for the siding work. They'd like to do James Hardy siding or something similar. Ms. Moermond asked if there was a garage or a shed on the properly. Mr. Van Houten answered that there was a garage; it's filled with tools and equipment. IYs too small for his vehicles. Ms. Moermond noted that when she looks at the photographs, she sees many things outside that need to be stored properly; there are a lot of buckets. Mr. Van Houten stated that the buckets are part of an on-going excavation which really can't be seen on the photos. Because this properry is on an embanlanent, one can't get big equipment near it; so, all of the excavating needs to be done by hand with buckets and wheelbanows. Ms. Moermond suggested that the buckets can not stay outside when they are not working on it. The yard needs to get cleaned-up and the construction materials need to be properly stored when they're not in use. Mr. Van Houten explained that some of the buckets aze there to catch water to keep it from going into the basement; and a lot of that water is used for gardening. Ms. Moermond stated that the buckets have got to go. A system can be put into place to capture water from the roof for gardening; a system thaYs code compliant. Ms. Moermond said that the situation looks out of control to her. Mr. Van Houten needs to put together a plan on how this is all going to get done. The City needs a commitment from him to finish the project and clean-up the yard. From the photographs, Ms. Moermond sees white plastic containers, scaffolding, scrap wood propped up against the house, wood products, etc. Ms. Moermond asked Mr. Van Houten whether he works. He responded that he works as a contract engineer. Sometimes, he's out of town for days; sometimes for weeks. Ms. Moermond asked if there were deadlines on the Conection Orders for the different jobs. Ms. Seeley replied that there were a few; Mr. Van Houten is past due on all the Orders on the house. He was supposed to be in compliance back in 2004; then again, this past spring (2006). The first Order that was sent out was in July 2004. Mr. Van Houten added that it was for painting and soffit repair. Ms. Seeley noted that the last Order was sent out with a deadline of June 2005. Mr. Palm stated that he and Ms. Seeley were discussing this before the hearing and have come up with some completion dates. The entire yard should be cleaned-up (spotless) by October 16, 2006; the siding and the roof done by the end of November, 2006. Mr. Van Houten noted that he is waiting for three (3) windows from the Restoration Shop. Mr. Palm added that this yazd is the worst he's seen and it needs to be cleaned-up. Mr. Van Houten said that he would like to be done on those dates he had intended to be done before now. Both the installation work and the front part of the house should be completed by the end of this weekend. Mr. Palm stated that if the yard is not cleaned-up by the agreed upon date, then Ms. Seeley will have a City work crew go out to clean it up, which will be very expensive ($225 per hour, plus administrative service fees). Then, it will be brought into Court, where Mr. Van Houten will face additional fines / jail time. A misdemeanor is punishable by ninety (90) days andior $1,000 fine. Ms. Moermond suggested that there are places to go to apply for a loan, which in some cases, are forgivable loans. Mr. Van Houten responded that since he is self-employed and doesn't haue good enough credit, he's not a good candidate for a loan. Ms. Seeley pointed out that there are grants available, up to $10,000, depending on a person's income. Ms. Moermond asked about the difficulty of getting help to do the work. Mr. Van Houten stated that he has had no problem with that. He said that he knows a couple of carpenters to call up when he needs help and he can call a relative or two. Ae doesn't have a problem getting labor. O(,P,-q��l October 17, 2006 Minutes of the Legislative Hearing 934 Hamnden Avenue (J0603E1) .,:_, (Laid over from September 19 and September 26; according to minutes, this is an update from staf� Per Steve Manger, an update was unavailable as the inspector was not in the office on 10l17/06. Ms. Moermond contacted the inspector on 10/18/06 who stated that over 50% of the work had been completed and she had granted the owner an extension to Friday, Oct. 20. Ms. Moermond recommended deleting the assessment.