Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Demolition topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City orders demolition of property cited for 49 code violations at 221420 Sixth Avenue
Summary
After a public hearing, the Tuscaloosa City Council ordered demolition of a property identified with 49 housing code violations and told the owner the city will bill demolition costs as a lien if it performs the work.
The Tuscaloosa City Council ordered the demolition of the property identified in the hearing as 221420 Sixth Avenue after a public hearing and staff recommendation.
City staff told the council the property had been condemned on 05/23/2025 and cited for 49 housing code violations. The owner, Catheria Taylor, attended the hearing and said much of the needed work is inside the house and that she had expected family members to repair the property. "I'm having trouble... Majority of, things to fix this property is inside the house. We was gonna try to salvage it," Taylor said.
City staff explained the process and financial consequences. Mister Williams, speaking for city staff, said the owner had been contacted, was aware of the hearing and that if the city demolished the structure, "the cost of the demolition will be charged back to the owner." Williams said the city would calculate costs for crew, equipment and disposal, forward the total to the attorney's office and then bill the owner; the amount would become a lien on the property if unpaid.
Williams and other staff also described timing and logistical steps: demolition would not occur immediately; the owner would have a few weeks to remove personal items, and the contractor would need to cap utilities and complete other preparations before demolition.
Taylor said she wanted time to arrange private demolition and asked whether she could hire someone herself. City staff confirmed she had that option during the window before the city contractor began work. After the public hearing, the council voted to order demolition as recommended by staff.
The council record does not specify the demolition contractor, an exact cost estimate, or a later date for the city's work; staff said those details would be provided by the city's attorney and operations staff following the order.
The order resolves a long-standing code enforcement request from the surrounding neighborhood; council members said the action aimed to protect nearby property values and health and safety in the district.
The clerk recorded the vote as an affirmative decision to proceed with demolition; staff indicated the owner will receive the detailed bill and timing information from the city's attorney and operations team.
