MEMORANDUM
Planning
& Development Services Department
Code
Enforcement Division
To: Diane Stoddard, Assistant City Manager
Thru: Victor Torres, Assistant Director,
Development Services
Brian Jimenez, Code Enforcement Manager
From: Dan Johnson, Code Enforcement
Officer
Date: January 25, 2008
As a follow up to a request for additional information
pertaining to other cities protocols in addressing demolition by neglect, CED
staff contacted 15 cities to obtain their procedures involving blighted
properties.
The
following 8 cities were called and emailed to provide feedback to staff. These cities either did not respond or did
not provide any relevant information to our inquiry.
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
The
following cities provided information:
The city of
In situations where the owner cannot be located, the case
will always be considered for demolition if the conditions warrant the removal
of the structure. Before it is
demolished, the city has a title company perform a title search in an attempt
to find all owners, banks, mortgage companies or other interested parties. They also publish the complaint and order two
times in the newspaper.
In situations where the structure is vacant, the city has
the structure secured (boarded up) by a contractor. The fees associated with this service are
then placed as a special assessment or lien against the property.
The City of
There are substandard conditions language in the city’s
code that allows for the city to make repairs but rarely do they proceed with
this option. The most likely scenario is
securing the structure or demolition.
When demolition is necessary, the city often encourages the owner to
take the property down.
The city’s main tool to fight blighted properties remains
the court process. Staff is aggressive
with filing complaints and each day is a separate violation. They looked at adopting a neglected building
ordinance but decided not to proceed.
The city did not demolish any properties during 2007 and
only a few were demolished in 2006. The
approximate population of
The city follows enforcement procedures similar to our
city. Violations are written and mailed
to the owner asking for the owner to bring the property into compliance. If the violations are severe enough to
warrant the property vacated then staff tracks the property to ensure there is an
end result.
The city does have a neglected building ordinance which
requires the owner to register the property with the city. There is a list of all properties that are
registered which is available to the public.
This list is often used by those who are seeking to purchase investments
properties or by people who are looking for “fixer uppers”. Many times a buyer discovers a property by viewing
this list and purchases the property which results in the problem being solved.
The city often relies on several faith organizations that
are willing to assist occupied structures where the owners are financially
unable to make the necessary repairs.
Additionally, there are high schools that have student volunteers that
will go to the neglected structure and assist with minor projects such as
painting of the exterior. As with all
cities, there are CDBG funds available to those who wish to apply for the funds
and qualify.
When there is a situation involving an abandoned property
that is in violation, the city has probate attorneys that oversee this
process. While the legal issues are
being addressed, staff makes sure the structure is secure and there are no
additional violations such as yard violations.
Last year the city ordered 40 demolitions as a result of staff’s
enforcement activity. The approximate
population of
The city of
Once a property is determined to be blighted, the owner
usually has between 45 to 60 days to make repairs. The city does have problems with vacant
structures as their city has lost thousands of jobs over the last few
decades. Many neighborhoods have lost
their fight to keep blighted properties from occurring due to the high number
of absentee property owners.
The city is very aggressive in removing structural nuisance
properties as there were 131 structures demolished in 2007 and the city is
projected to remove another 300 this year.
It is the city’s hope that the property will be redeveloped or at least
be green space until the redevelopment occurs.
The city very seldom experiences any opposition from the public
regarding the demolition of structures.
The population of
City staff determines if the property requires repair work
to be done or is a candidate for demolition.
If the property remains in non-compliance after orders to repair or
demolish have been made their code allows for up to a $100 dollar fine per
day. The city has the option in their
code for the city to make the repairs, however this option is seldom exercised. In most cases, there is usually a fine and in
the most serve cases the structure is taken down.
The city has taken down as many as 13 structures in a
year. In the last few years, the city
has not ordered any structures to be demolished. Part of the reason the city has not
demolished any structures within the last couple of years is they have shifted
their focus to exerting pressure on the owners to demolish the structures
themselves or make the necessary repairs to avert possible demolition. There are no regulations pertaining to
requiring vacant structures to be registered with the city.
There are CDBG funds available however much like our city the
properties must be owner occupied and those owners must be willing to apply and
qualify for the funds available.
The city also handles blighted properties much like our
like city. If the property is in
disrepair but not to the point of demolition a notice of violation is sent to
the owner. All violations are identified
and the owner is asked to make contact with the inspector to submit a repair
plan. The city currently has 116
properties in this state of condition. If
the owner fails to make repairs the case is then forwarded to city court. The city experiences favorable results with
the cases as the judge is a former prosecuting attorney and has a very good
understanding of what the city is trying to accomplish by removing severely
dilapidated structures.
If the property is in a condition that supports demolition,
a certified letter is mailed to the owner giving the owner 30 days to make
repairs or demolish. The owner has the
right to make an appeal during these 30 days during a dangerous building
hearing that is held once a month. If
the property in question is vacant and the owner cannot be located the city
will publish in newspaper identifying the property as to be demolished.
The majority of structures that are demolished by the city
are funded through CDBG funds. Last
year, the city ordered 25 structures demolished and in 2006 the city removed 43
structures. The approximate population
of
The city has an ordinance similar to
When the owner of a vacant building fails to actively
maintain and manage the building, the building usually becomes a major cause of
blight in both residential and nonresidential neighborhoods. Once a building becomes in violation, the
city lists all open vacant building cases on the city website which is updated
monthly.
The penalties associated with the ordinance consists of a
monthly monitoring fee of $150 in addition to a $150 enforcement response fee
for each time city personnel is called to the vacant building site. A penalty up to $1,000 is imposed for the
first violation and up to $5,000 for every 30 days for every subsequent
violation. The new ordinance places a
new requirement of posting a notice in a conspicuous place on the front of the
building stating the name, address and phone number of the owner(s) of the
property.
The city’s population is approximately 450,000 which makes
it the largest city researched. It is reasonable
to conclude the scope of the city’s problems with neglected buildings
corresponds with the size of the city as there are currently 18 pages of
neglected vacant buildings listed on the city’s website.
Summary
The above-mentioned research correlates with the research
that was provided in the memo dated December 18, 2007. It is staff’s opinion that there are no easy
solutions to the problem of demolition by neglect. After researching other city’s policies and
ordinances, staff has learned the following: