Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council orders removal of long‑vacant CVS at 499 Snelling Ave N after years of nuisance complaints
Summary
Following a legislative hearing and extensive neighborhood testimony, the St. Paul City Council ordered the removal of the vacant CVS building at 499 Snelling Avenue North within 15 days, citing repeated police calls, safety concerns and failure to remediate code violations. The council adopted the Legislative Hearing Officer's recommendation.
The Saint Paul City Council voted on Nov. 5 to order the raising and removal of the vacant CVS building at 499 Snelling Avenue North after a legislative hearing in which staff documented extensive code violations, repeated police calls, and ongoing nuisance conditions.
Legislative Hearing Officer testimony summarized a long record of code enforcement: the site has been effectively vacant since May 2020, had its certificate of occupancy revoked in 2023, and the record included dozens of abatement notices, multiple work orders and hundreds of police calls. Photos and inspection reports submitted to the record showed broken windows, interior damage, boarded openings, accumulated refuse, and evidence that the interior systems (ventilation, electrical) were compromised.
Attorneys for CVS (tenant) and for the property owner told the council they were engaged in efforts to market or sell the site and asked for a pause (CVS and counsel requested a 120‑day stay to pursue prospective buyers and coordinate potential redevelopment). CVS also described stepped‑up maintenance and offered short‑term measures such as painting, removal of the dumpster corral, and improved building security. Neighborhood leaders, residents and civic organizations provided sustained testimony that the property had been a long‑term blight, citing public‑safety incidents, discarded syringes, vandalism and lost business activity in the Hamline‑Midway area.
After hearing both the owner and tenant and dozens of neighbors and stakeholders, Council Member Coleman moved to adopt the Legislative Hearing Officer's recommendation to order raising and removal of the structure within 15 days. Coleman cited the long enforcement record and the documented harm to the community and said the council's role was to eliminate the immediate public nuisance. The motion carried and the council adopted the removal order.
Why this matters: the property is at a heavily trafficked intersection in the Hamline‑Midway area; neighborhoods testified that the vacant building depressed commercial activity, generated repeated police responses, created health hazards and impeded near‑term reinvestment. Council action clears the site of an immediate public nuisance; ownership, redevelopment and long‑term reuse remain next steps subject to standard property and redevelopment processes.
What happens next: the city will enforce removal if not completed by the deadline. Demolition clears the nuisance but does not guarantee immediate redevelopment; several residents and local groups urged the city and owner to prioritize community‑responsive reuse and avoid protracted vacancy after demolition.
