Detroit council committee reviews dozens of dangerous‑building cases; many owners given time to comply

Detroit — Detroit City Council members and city building‑safety officials reviewed a long agenda of dangerous‑building cases on a hearing that produced a mix of demolition orders, withdrawals and returns to the Building, Safety, Environmental and Engineering Department (BSEED) for follow up.

The hearing gave property owners a series of options short of immediate demolition, including boarding openings, filing a vacant‑property registration and submitting a deferral application to BSEED. Administration staff said owners also must pay any inspection fees and address delinquent taxes before a deferral is granted.

Why it matters: Dozens of vacant, fire‑damaged or open properties can pose safety risks to neighbors, and the committee used the hearing to press owners to take specific steps. In several cases the committee withdrew demolition orders after owners showed evidence of repairs; in others the committee voted to concur with department findings and keep demolition as an available outcome.

Department presentation and owner obligations

Dilip Patel of building and safety summarized BSEED inspections and the department’s recommendation list, and an administration representative (identified in the hearing as Mr. Trail) outlined how owners may seek a deferral. The administration representative said owners must, among other items, provide proof of ownership or interest, pay inspection fees, secure openings and submit a completed deferral application. "You have the opportunity to... request a deferral of the demolition order," the administration representative told callers.

Multiple callers described ongoing repair efforts but said work or contracting delays slowed progress. The hearing repeatedly directed owners to: (1) board or otherwise secure openings to prevent trespass, (2) submit vacant‑property registration paperwork, (3) provide photos and permit applications to BSEED, and (4) resolve tax delinquencies when present.

Examples from the hearing

- 12069 Wilford (caller Isis Everett): The owner said a contractor failed to complete work and that she has boarded windows and is seeking another contractor. Committee members pressed her to file the vacant‑property registration and email photos to BSEED; staff confirmed they received the photos and recommended withdrawing the demolition order.

- 14434 Houston Whittier (owner Nadia Elmore): BSEED described a fire‑damaged dwelling open to trespass. Elmore said she had completed a vacant‑property registration the same day and was arranging a contractor to secure openings; the committee returned the case to BSEED for follow up.

- 13409 Robson (owner Jerome Hill): Hill said he would board the building, submit the vacant‑property registration and remove an inoperable commercial vehicle near the lot; the committee returned jurisdiction to BSEED for monitoring.

- 5093 Underwood (owner Crystal McPherson): McPherson said she intends to demolish the fire‑damaged structure, that her insurer had provided a quote, and that she would submit a signed contract if she proceeds herself. The committee agreed to return the case to BSEED and asked for a signed contract to hold city demolition.

- 6400 Epworth (attorney Amanda Ventogel Backer representing a court‑appointed receiver): The property is commercial, under receivership and subject to a pending sale. The hearing continued the item to BSEED to allow the sale process (scheduled for early March) to proceed; the hearing recorded the committee’s expectation that the receiver or buyer secure openings while the sale is pending.

Decisions and motions

Throughout the hearing members routinely moved to either withdraw a demolition order when BSEED confirmed compliance steps had been completed, or to return items to BSEED when owners committed to repairs, registration or documentation. Where owners did not provide evidence of progress and the department recommended demolition, the committee recorded concurrence with the department’s findings.

Votes at a glance (selected block‑level outcomes recorded by the committee)

- Block 9: Committee voted to concur with department findings (outcome recorded without objection). - Block 10: Committee voted to concur with department findings (outcome recorded without objection). - Block 11: Committee voted to concur with department findings (outcome recorded without objection). - Block 12: Committee voted to concur with department findings (outcome recorded without objection). - Block 13: Committee voted to concur with department findings (outcome recorded without objection). - Block 14: Committee voted to concur with department findings (outcome recorded without objection). - Block 15: Committee voted to concur with department findings (outcome recorded without objection). - Block 16: Committee voted to concur with department findings (outcome recorded without objection). - Block 17: Committee voted to concur with department findings (outcome recorded without objection).

How the process works (practice points from the hearing)

- Boarding and photos: BSEED repeatedly told owners that securing openings and emailing photographic evidence to the department can prompt withdrawal or deferral.

- Vacant‑property registration: Owners were instructed to submit the city’s vacant‑property registration (Detroitmi.gov → BSEED) as an early compliance step.

- Deferral application: If the council orders demolition, owners can apply for a deferral with BSEED; the department listed required elements (ownership documents, inspection fees, permits and registration).

- Taxes and foreclosure risk: Staff and members noted outstanding city or county taxes can affect timelines; one caller was advised of a pending Wayne County foreclosure timeline tied to unpaid taxes.

What to watch next

BSEED will follow up on cases returned to the department; the committee set the next dangerous‑buildings hearing date in April and asked owners who submitted evidence to confirm it with BSEED ahead of that hearing. Owners who wish to avoid a city‑contract demolition were told providing signed private contracts and evidence of active work can lead the department to hold a demolition action while repairs proceed.

Ending: The hearing closed after the committee completed motions on the remaining blocks and the chair adjourned the session.