Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Condemnation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mount Vernon board unanimously condemns 2 Marmot Drive, orders demolition
Summary
The Board of Property Maintenance Appeals voted July 30 to condemn a long-vacant house at 2 Marmot Drive as unfit for human habitation and ordered demolition after inspectors presented photographic and in-person evidence of structural failure, vermin and lengthy neglect.
Get email alerts on the Property Condemnation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Mount Vernon Board of Property Maintenance Appeals voted unanimously July 30 to condemn a vacant house at 2 Marmot Drive and ordered it demolished after code enforcement presented years of photographs and a recent interior inspection that found structural failure and rodent infestation.
The decision followed a presentation by Brian Marvin, the city’s property maintenance enforcement officer, who summarized inspections and historical records showing complaints dating back to 1996 and photographs from 2015 through 2024. Marvin told the board the interior inspection under a search warrant found "food left in the kitchen," "rats squealing" and water-damaged, failing ceilings, and he recommended demolition. "I recommend this place be demolished," Marvin said.
The board’s action matters, officials said, because the house presented a public-health and public-safety hazard to adjoining properties and the neighborhood. Tanner Salyers, Mount Vernon’s safety-service director, said the city has a responsibility to "protect public health, ensure public safety and to preserve the value and integrity of our neighborhoods." Salyers spoke for the administration during the hearing.
Marvin traced the enforcement history during the hearing, showing photographs from city records and his own site visits after taking the position in April. He reported boarded windows, collapsed and rotting porches, missing gutters, failing structural members and heavy vegetation overgrowth. Marvin said code staff obtained and executed a search warrant to inspect the interior; the inspection was halted when officers reached a point where debris and structural failure made further entry unsafe.
Homeowner Jeanne Armstrong, who identified herself at the hearing and said she is currently staying with her son, asked the board for more time to obtain legal counsel and to complete repairs. "I would like a continuance so that I can get legal representation," Armstrong said, adding that family members were working this week to clear debris and had placed a dumpster on site. Board members and staff acknowledged those efforts but referenced the lengthy enforcement history and the condition documented in photographs and on the search-warrant inspection.
Scott Zimmerman, a sworn witness who said he participated in the search-warrant entry alongside the fire department, health department and police, told the board the structure was among the worst he had seen in his public-service career. "This was probably the worst structure I've seen," Zimmerman said, describing visible evidence of animal roosting, heavy vermin activity and severe interior damage.
After hearing testimony and accepting public comment from neighbors who reported long-standing problems from the property, a motion to condemn and order demolition was made and seconded. The board voted by roll call; present members recorded their votes in favor. The board declared the property condemned for vacation and demolition by a unanimous vote (yes: 7; no: 0; abstain: 0).
City staff said the demolition timetable will follow Mount Vernon’s property maintenance and demolition code (Chapter 13). The city will issue an official written order after the board’s vote that will be served on the homeowner. Staff explained that the owner is responsible for demolition costs; if the owner does not pay, the city may contract for demolition and attempt to recoup costs through property tax liens or other legal measures.
Board members closed the hearing by noting a proposed set of updated bylaws from the mayor and asking members to review those draft bylaws before the next meeting. The board also noted it will be more active in coming months because of pending cases.
The official written order and the specific timing for demolition will be set by the board’s administrative process and by citation to the city code; the board did not adopt a specific demolition date at the hearing.

