Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Unsafe Structure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hopkinsville board finds 2007 South Virginia Street an unsafe structure; grants 90 days for repairs
Summary
The City of Hopkinsville Code Ordinance Enforcement Board found the house at 2007 South Virginia Street to be an unsafe structure after code officers documented interior and exterior deterioration, and assessed the minimum fine plus a $200 administrative fee and a 90‑day compliance period.
The City of Hopkinsville Code Ordinance Enforcement Board on Oct. 14 unanimously determined that the property at 2007 South Virginia Street violated local property‑maintenance and unsafe‑structure standards and ordered the owner to bring the property into compliance within 90 days.
Code enforcement officer Mark D'Armond told the board the property—listed on city records as owned by Heritage Bay Development, LLC—had prior property‑maintenance citations dating to August 2024. An inspection on May 30, 2025, found the front door unsecured and multiple interior and exterior failures, including broken windows, areas where exterior asbestos shingles had come off exposing weathered siding, plaster‑and‑lath ceilings and walls that had crumbled, an open and unsecured breaker box, and evidence that utilities had been inactive for years. D'Armond said the structure met the city checklist criteria for an unsafe structure.
Ruby Elizabeth Pinnell, who identified herself as the property’s listing agent and neighbor, told the board she has shown the house more than 22 times and that prospective buyers have been hesitant because the renovation scope is large. Reading from a prepared letter, Pinnell asked the board to "reconsider any plans for demolition" and argued the house is "a valuable and restorable piece of the district's historic fabric." She said the yard has been maintained and there have been no safety incidents during showings.
After discussion of the factual record and the ordinance's limits, the board voted that the city had met its burden that a violation existed. The board then assessed the ordinance minimum fine of $350, imposed a $200 administrative fee, and set a 90‑day period for compliance. City staff indicated paperwork was available for the agent before leaving the hearing and said the 90‑day clock would begin the day after the board's order.
The board noted the limits of its authority: the 90‑day maximum is set by city ordinance and may be extended only for special circumstances listed in the ordinance (for example, pending litigation or certain insurance settlements). The board and staff said they would work with any purchaser who enters a rehabilitation agreement but emphasized immediate action is needed to avoid abatement or demolition proceedings.
