Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Condemnation Roundup topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pineville council issues multiple condemnation notices, gives owners time to present repair plans
Summary
At a Dec. 16 special meeting the Pineville City Council approved condemnation notices or continuances for more than a dozen properties, often granting 30–90 days for owners or prospective buyers to submit itemized repair plans, financial proof and permits before demolition or grant-funded cleanup.
PINEVILLE — The Pineville City Council spent most of its Dec. 16 special meeting reviewing a string of condemnation and combination hearings for dilapidated properties across the city, approving notices while frequently allowing property owners or prospective buyers time to submit plans and documentation.
Council members and city staff described repeatedly that the properties presented an "attractive nuisance" with structural decay, broken glass and overgrowth, and in several cases potential asbestos siding or roofing. For owners or representatives who appeared, the council routinely approved a 30-day voluntary clear period or a continuance (60 to 90 days in select cases) while encouraging submission of itemized improvement lists, contractor licensing documentation and cost estimates.
Mayor (speaker 1) and staff (speaker 2) framed the policy goal as neighborhood cleanup and public safety. "We're just trying to move forward with the grant money," the mayor said during discussion of a property tied to an out-of-state mortgage servicer. Staff repeatedly asked owners to provide licensed Louisiana plumbers, electricians and contractors, along with timetables and bank documentation of financial capacity.
Several cases drew extended discussion. The council moved items 17 and 18 to the front of the agenda because legal representatives for out-of-state owners were present. For 606 Sanders Street (item 17), the council approved condemnation with the option to remove the property from the condemnation list if a viable plan was filed within the period approved by the council. For 113 Holly Oak Street (item 18), a local representative said the owners planned a six-month rehabilitation and the council allowed 60 days to produce a formal plan for review.
Other actions approved by the council included 30-day voluntary-clear notices for the mobile home at 204 Madison Street and single-family homes at 207 Dorothy Street, 110 and 112 Wood Street, 130 Buchanan Street, 510 Baptist Street, 105 Hoffman Street, 112 Lizzie Street and others. In cases where an owner was present and reported active remediation or imminent repairs, the council often granted a continuance to allow inspections, permit work and submission of estimates rather than immediate demolition.
Owners and representatives who addressed the council included prospective buyer William LeBlanc (speaker 7), who said his wife plans to lead renovation work at 606 Sanders, and Patricia Shaw (speaker 12), who asked that the city not remove her inherited property if grant-funded demolition would result in a clear lot for her family. Tyra Teasley (speaker 6) told the council that criminal trespassers had caused some damage to the mobile home at 1607 Melrose Street and that her family intends to bring the property into compliance.
Council members emphasized the practical requirements for rehabilitations: licensed contractors, asbestos testing or permitted encapsulation where appropriate, itemized budgets, and a realistic timeframe. "We normally maybe give them 30 days … a bonafide list where it's a detailed listing of itemized improvements," staff said during one hearing.
The motions were largely procedural voice votes; where a specific tally was recorded the council noted three ayes and two nays for one debated item. In other cases the council approved motions without recorded roll-call tallies on the floor.
What happens next: owners or their representatives who wish to avoid demolition must file the requested plans, cost estimates and contractor documentation with the mayor's office or the city's inspector by the deadlines set in each case. If a property remains ineligible for rehabilitation under the grant program, the city may proceed with demolition and clear the lot under the grant, which staff said would leave the property owner with a cleared lot and no lien if the grant funds the demolition.
The council heard these property items before approving a separate personnel resolution adding two temporary city government holidays.
