Hammond board affirms demolition orders for multiple deteriorated outbuildings; owners given time to respond

Hammond City Board of Public Works members on Feb. 5 affirmed orders to demolish several outbuildings and vacant structures they deemed unsafe, while telling some owners they would have time to seek repairs or present progress before the city solicits bids for removal.

The board heard presentations from city enforcement staff that certified notices had been mailed, posted and published, and showed photographs documenting collapsed roofs, missing doors and other hazardous conditions. The city said the structures meet the definition of a “vacant or unsafe building” under the Unsafe Building Act and recommended the board affirm demolition orders.

The matter drew owners and neighbors to the meeting. Natalie Resenenko, identified as a family member of the titleholder for 7114 Columbia, acknowledged the photos were of her property and said her parents previously owned the house; she said she and her sister live in the main house. Resenenko told the board they lack funds to repair outbuildings and that the rear structures are not occupied. City staff told her there would be no immediate out-of-pocket cost today but that a lien would be placed on the property to cover demolition if the city proceeds later.

At 829 Ames, Tandalea Johnson Gardner and a companion said they purchased a parcel at tax sale and had twice cleaned the garage. Gardner said she intends to restore the garage and estimated completion around July if she can obtain contractors and permits. City enforcement staff told Gardner the board would likely bid demolition work in six to eight weeks if the owner did not show progress, and reiterated that temporary measures, inspections and licensed contractors would be required if she pursued rehabilitation. The board asked Gardner to coordinate with city inspections staff (Lueder) and said she could return with progress photos; staff also said the board typically waits six to eight weeks before awarding a contract to remove a structure.

Other properties the board affirmed for demolition included 7114 Columbia (garage and shed), 5217 Homan (the former Jack Fox building, where staff reported extensive mold and water damage), and 2117 Sherman (a dilapidated shed). For each of those items the board voted to affirm the city’s order. No board member recorded a dissent; each motion was seconded and approved with the board answering “aye.”

City enforcement staff emphasized that notices had been served by certified mail where possible, posted on-site and published in the newspaper, and presented photographic evidence to support each order. Where owners appeared and described plans to repair, staff outlined the practical timelines: roughly six to eight weeks before the city would bid removal work, and an expectation that an owner who wishes to rehabilitate should obtain inspections and licensed contractors and submit updates to the board.

The board’s actions affirm orders but do not mean immediate demolition; staff will proceed with the next administrative steps for each property, which may include bid solicitation, placement of liens to recover city costs and follow-up inspections. Owners in the room were told how to contact inspections staff to coordinate possible repairs or to receive future notices.

The board also approved an invoice-related lien release earlier in the meeting for work at 30 Conkey Street; the invoice amount presented to the board was $14,225 and the board approved removing the lien consistent with submitted proof of demolition work.

The board closed the demolition items after directing staff to return with documentation or to proceed with the typical timeline for bidding work where owners do not complete repairs.