Glendale council authorizes city attorney to pursue nuisance action at 1005 W. Riverview Drive

The Glendale Common Council on Monday authorized the city attorney to pursue a nuisance action in circuit court to abate conditions at 1005 West Riverview Drive.

Council members said the property has been the subject of repeated complaints and short-term cleanups that were followed by new accumulations of materials and vehicles. The council voted to declare the parcel a chronic property-maintenance nuisance and to allow staff and legal counsel to seek court orders and other remedies to compel long-term compliance.

City Attorney: “The city has the ability to seek a court order to abate the nuisance, which would either allow the city to clean up and correct any conditions on the property that are not in compliance with the code and then charge it back as a special charge at the end of the year,” the city attorney said during the meeting. The attorney also said the city could seek a cease-and-desist order for business activities on the property and pursue contempt if violations continue.

Alder Doherty said the issue has persisted for years. “This has been going on for years, and it's at this serious stage we're at…The city's put in an inordinate amount of time on this property to get anything done. Something happens, and then it just reverts back,” Doherty said, urging legal action.

Council members described recurring problems tied to what staff and counsel said appears to be a junk-collection or sorting operation at the property. The city attorney told the council staff believe the owner operates a business that brings items to the site for sorting, which contributes to a continual cycle of material appearing on the property.

Officials outlined enforcement options that could reduce city costs or recoup them later: abatement with special charges placed on the tax roll; daily ordinance-based fines or reinspection fees; and asking the court for taxable costs if litigation proceeds. The city attorney cautioned the overall legal cost would depend on whether the owner contests the case in court.

Neighbors’ quality of life was cited as a concern. Council members said smells, unregistered vehicles, and blocked use of yards have persisted in the neighborhood. Doherty described the property as the most severe long-running case he has handled.

By motion, moved by Alder Doherty and seconded in the meeting record by Alder McGellhard, the council approved directing the city attorney to proceed. The council recorded the motion as carried; no roll-call vote tally was given in the meeting record.

The action authorizes the city to pursue court orders to abate the nuisance and to seek recovery of abatement costs and fees consistent with state statute and city ordinance.