Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council gives code-enforcement a short deadline for 409 E. Hale; abatement plan ready if owner does not act
Summary
Council directed staff to require a demolition permit within 15 days for a deteriorating detached structure at 409 East Hale Street; staff will abate and place costs on the property if owners fail to comply.
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The council discussed a long-running code-enforcement case at 409 East Hale Street during the March 13 meeting and gave staff a firm timetable to proceed if the property owners do not take action.
Why it matters: The property includes a detached structure that the city previously deemed a dangerous structure. The council previously extended time for the owners to remove or repair the structure; staff reported no permit had been pulled and said debris was now in the yard.
What staff reported: Code enforcement officer Brandon reported a quote to abate the structure and restore the site of approximately $6,600. The property owner previously told staff that insurance would not cover removal. Staff also said they had attempted contact and left messages on February 25, and that the owners had not requested the 30-day extension that the resolution allows.
Council direction: Council members agreed to give the owners one final, short opportunity to begin the required process. The council directed staff to require the owners to pull a demolition permit within 15 days; if the permit is pulled staff agreed to allow 30 days from permit issuance to complete work. If the permit is not pulled within 15 days the council directed staff to proceed with city abatement and to assess abatement costs against the property per existing code.
Administrative steps: Staff will leave door-hanger notice, document that action photographically, send a certified letter to owners and proceed with the abatement quote if the deadline is not met.
What the motion did not do: There was no immediate abatement order executed at the meeting; the council instead set deadlines and delegated abatement authority to staff if the owners failed to comply.

