Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:06]

>> MARCH 2ND, 2012 BOARD OF BUILDING STANDARDS MEETING TO ORDER. THOSE WISHING TO SPEAK SHALL HAVE SIGNED IN AT THE DOOR IF YOU HAVE NOT DONE SO, PLEASE DO SO AT THIS TIME WHILE WE COMPLETE OUR DUTIES HERE.

[MINUTES]

FIRST ORDER ON THE AGENDA IS AN APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF OUR LAST FEBRUARY MEETING. ARE THERE ADDITION OR CORRECTIONS? IS THERE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL?

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.

>> I'LL SECOND. >> MOTION BY MR. SCHROEDER AND SECONDED BY MR. WEBB. ROLL CALL PLEASE? SECTION CUSE ME. AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE MINUTES. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TO THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY MEETING PLEASE STEP FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

SEEING NO ONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ROLL CALL PLEASE? >> DR. PARIS?

>> AYE. >> MR. WEBB?

>> YES. >> MR. TURNER?

>> YES. >> MR. SCHROEDER?

>> MESS. >> MR. TURNER?

>> YES. >> AS A STATEMENT OF POLICY IN ALL CASES WHERE SPECIFICALLY STATED OTHERWISE, BUILDINGS MUST BE SECURED AND THE LOT CLONED AND MOREWED WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THE RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE OF THIS HEARING.

IF NOT DONE SO THE CITY MAY DO SO AND BILL THE OWNERS.

IN ANY CASE WHERE THE BOARD ORDER THE DESTRUCTION OF A STRUCTURE AND THE OWNER FAILS TO DEMOLISH OR APPEAL THE ORDER THE CITY MAY DEMOLISH. ANY APPEAL MUST BE FILED IN DISTRICT COURT WITHIN 30 CALENDAR DAYS AFTER THE AGREED PARTY RECEIVED NOTICE OF THE DECISION.

YOU SHOULD BE PREPARED TO PRESENT THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION, SPECIFIC TIMEFRAME NEEDED FOR REPAIRS, SPECIFIC SCOPE OF REPAIR WORK TO BE COMPLETED AND COST ESTIMATES FOR THE WORK TO BE DONE BY A LICENSE BONDED CONTRACTOR SUCH AS ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING AND HEATING AND AIR-CONDITIONING.

YOU HAVE RIGHT TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY TO REPRESENT YOU AT THE HEARING AND THE RIGHT TO INSPECT THE FILE ON THE PROPERTY AT THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PRIOR TO THE HEARING AND THE RIGHT TO REQUEST THE PRESENCE OF CITY STAFF FOR THE PURPOSES OF QUESTIONING FAT HEARING.

WITH THAT BEING SAID THOSE WISHING TO SPEAK PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SO LEMLY SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU SHALL GIVE TODAY IS THE TRUTH AND THE WHOLE TRUTH

AND NOTHINGING BUT TRUTH? >> YES.

[A. Case for Rehabilitation, Demolition, or Civil Penalties - Case No. 21-003216: 1009 S. 12th St. (NORTHINGTON W/2, BLOCK C, LOT W54.05 E140 N101, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS), Owner: Legacy Dwelling, LLC]

>> THANK YOU. >> WITH THAT MR. MARS, WE'RE

READY FOR OUR FIRST CASE? >> GOOD MORNING. CODE OFFICER FOR THE COMMUNITY ENHANCEMENT DIVISION PROGRAM.

WE HAVE A TOTAL OF FIVE CASES ON OUR AGENDA TODAY.

PUBLIC NOTICE WAS SENT FOR TODAY'S MEETING WITH THE FIVE CASES. FIRST CASE ON THE AGENDA IS CASE CASE NO. 21-003216: 1009 SOUTH 12TH STREET. NORTHINGTON W/2, BLOCK C, LOT W54.05 E140 N101, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS. THE CHECKLIST FOR THE RECORDS SEARCH SHOWS LEGACY DWELLING AS THE OWNER UNDER WARRANTY DEED AND LEGGETT DRIVE TO BE THE OWNER.

SECRETARY SHOWS AGENTS INCORPORATED TO BE THE REGISTERED AGENT AND TAX RECORDS AND MUNICIPALITY ARE NOT APPLICABLE. UTILITY RECORDS SHOW TO BE INACTIVE SINCE SEPTEMBER OF 2019.

THE SEARCH REVEALS LEGACY DWELLING L.L.C. TO BE THE OWNER.

THERE IS NOTICE FOR TODAY'S MEETING AND THERE'S FRONT SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. THE REAR SOUTHSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. THE EAST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.

AND THE WEST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.

SO UPON INSPECTION THESE WERE THE SUBSTANDARD CODE VIOLATIONS IDENTIFIED IN CHAPTER 8 AND 19 AND WE HAVE INADEQUATE SANITATION AND NUISANCE. HAZARDOUS PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL WIRING AND EQUIPMENT AND FAULTY WEATHER PROTECTION.

[00:05:04]

HERE'S THE HAZARDOUS PLUMBING. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THE GAS, IT SHOWS PLUMBING NOT BEING PROPERLY MAINTAINED.

WE HAVE FAULTY WEATHER PROTECTION AND MISSING SIDING AND DAMAGE FROM FIRE. THIS IS A NUISANCE AND FALLS INTO THE DELAP ACCOMODATION CODE AND WE HAVE COLLAPSED CEILING THROUGHOUT THE IN TIER KROR OF THE STRUCTURE AND FIRE DAMAGE.

THERE'S MORE WITH THE DELAP ACCOMODATION.

HERE'S THE STRUCTURAL HAZARDOUS IF YOU LOOK TO THE LEFT THE INTEEM CHARRED FROM THE FIRE DAMAGE AND THE BEAM ON THE RIGHT IS CRACKED AND SLIT. INADEQUATE SANITATION.

WE HAVE THE TOILET AND FACILITIES ARE NOT BEING PROPERLY MAINTAINED. HAZARDOUS MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT.

AIR DUCTS EXPOSED AND ONE THAT'S COLLAPSED THROUGH THE CEILING.

HAZARDOUS ELECTRICAL WIRING YOU SEE TO THE LEFT THERE'S LOOSE WIRES THROUGH THE CEILING ANNA MARIE OUTLET HANGING OUT OF THE WALL. SO THE TIME OF THE EVENTS IS THIS STRUCTURE CAUGHT FIRE IN FEBRUARY OF 2021.

THIS BEEN BEFORE THE BOARD BEFORE.

IT WAS CONDEMNED ON AUGUST 12TH AND THE APPLICATION WAS FILED AT THE COUNTY ON AUGUST 18TH IN DECEMBER WE BROUGHT IT BEFORE THE BOARD OF BUILDING STANDARDS AND THAT'S WHERE IT IS AT AND THE BOARD ORDERED 3060 AND DCEMBER 3RD LETTERS WERE SENT.

ON DECEMBER 23RD WE MET WITH THE INDIVIDUAL BY THE SAYING HE WAS THE OWNER OF THE STRUCTURE. A TEXT MESSAGE WAS RECEIVED FROM HIM THAT HE HAD JUST COME TO DOWN AND SAW IT WAS CONDEMNED AND INQUIREING HE COULD REPAIR IT AND THE CODE OFFICER TOLD HIM ALL THE DOCUMENTS NEEDED. DECEMBER 29TH SPOKE TO THE INDIVIDUAL AGAIN TO REMIND HIM OF CODE AND JANUARY 7 TO THE BRING THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS AND JANUARY 28TH, STILL NO CHANGE OR PERMITS PULLED. FEBRUARY 9TH AGAIN NO CONTACT SINCE DECEMBER 29TH SO NO PERMITS OR DOCUMENTS RECEIVED.

THERE WAS NO RESPONSE. SO DUE TO THE FINDING INS THE CODE VIOLATIONS STAFF RECOMMENDS TO FIND THE PROPERTY IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND A HAZARD TO THE SAFETY AND WOULD BE UNREASONABLE AND FURTHER ORDER THE OWNER TO DEMOLISH OR APPEAL WITHIN 30

DAYS OR THE CITY MAY DEMOLISH. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. MARE MARS. THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME ALL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS CASE.

ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE STEP FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 21-003216.

I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION OR A MOTION.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME WE'VE SEEN THIS PROJECT?

SECOND TIME? >> YES, SIR.

WE BROUGHT IT BEFORE THE BOARD ON DECEMBER FIRST.

>> THANK YOU. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION?

>> YES? >> SO THIS FIRE WAS OVER A YEAR

AGO? >> YES, SIR, THAT'S CORRECT.

>> AND THE OWNERS MADE NO EFFORT TO DO ANYTHING SINCE THEN?

>> NO, SIR. >> OKAY.

>> IS THERE A MOTION? >> I HAVE A MOTION OF A FIND THAT PROPERTY IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND THAT IT IS A HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE AND REPAIR THE STRUCTURE

WOULD BE UNREASONABLE. >> IS THERE A SECOND.

>> I SECOND. >> MOTION BY MR. SCHROEDER AND SECOND BY MR. TURNER THAT THE PROPERTY IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND HAZARD TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND WELFARE AND THE REPAIR OF THE STRUCTURE WOULD BE UNREASONABLE. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

ROLL CALL PLEASE? >> DR. PARIS?

>> AYE. >> MR. MASK CLARION?

>> AYE. >> MR. WEBB?

>> YES. >> MR. TURNER?

>> YES. >> MR. SCHROEDER?

>> YES. >> MR. BEARD?

[00:10:02]

>> YES. >> MOTION PASSED.

>> AND FURTHER I WOULD LIKE TO ORDER THE OWN ER THAT THE OWNER IS ORDERED TO DEMOLISH OR APPEAL THE ORDER TO THE DISTRICT COURT WITHIN 30-DAYS OR THE CITY MAY DEMOLISH.

>> MOTION BY MR. SCHROEDER. SECOND?

>> I SECOND. >> BY MR. TURNER THAT OWNERS IS ORDERED TO DEMOLISH OR APPEAL TO THE DISTRICT COURT WITHIN 30 DAYS OR THE CITY MAY DEMOLISH. ROLL CALL.

>> DR. PARIS? >> AYE.

>> MR. MCBRAIR? >> YES.

>> MR. WEBB? >> YES.

>> MR. TURNER? >> YES.

>> MR. SCHROEDER? >> YES.

[B. Case for Rehabilitation, Demolition, or Civil Penalties - Case No. 21-004456: 3902/3906 Lynwood Ln. (ELMWOOD WEST, SEC D, BLOCK 5, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS), Owner Kuruvila Joe Trustee of the 610 S. Leggett Dr. Land Trust]

>> MR. BEARD? >> YES.

>> MOTION PASSES. >> THANK YOU.

NEXT CASE? >> SO THE NEXT CASE.

THE NEXT THREE YOU'LL SEE A LOT OF SIMILARITIES THE TIMELINES EXCEPT FOR THE STRUCTURES. THE FIRST ONE IS CASE NUMBER.

21-004456: 3902/3906 LYNWOOD LANE. ELMWOOD WEST, SECTION D, BLOCK 5, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS. IT'S APARTMENT COMPLEX AND THE UNITS FOR LYNNWOOD LANE UNITS. SO ACCORDING TO THE RECORD.

COUNTY RECORDS HAS A WARRANTY DEED NAMING JOE KURUVILA AS THE OWNER AND A DEED OF TRUST NAMING DANIEL RATTLE AS THE LEAN HOLDER AND KURUVILA THE LAST TRUST TO BE THE OWNER AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE SHOWS NO ENTITY UNDER THIS NAME AND TAX RECORDS ARE NOT APPLICABLE. UTILITY RECORDS HAVE NO RECORDS FOUND FOR THE STRUCTURE DUE TO WATER METERS BEING USED TO SERVICE MULTIPLE UNITS. THE SEARCH REVEALS KURUVILA TRUSTEE OF THE LEGGETT DRIVE LAND TRUST TO BE THE OWNER SO THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW. AN IMAGE OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION. THE STRUCTURE CIRCLED IN YELLOW IS THE MAIN OFFICE OF THE APARTMENT COMPLEX AND THE STRUCTURE IN RED ABOVE IS THE STRUCTURE IN QUESTION.

THIS WAS THE PUBLIC NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED ON THE STRUCTURE FOR TODAY'S MEETING. THIS IS THE FRONT SOUTHSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. THE REAR NORTH SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE, THE EAST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE, AND THE WEST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. ACCORDING TO INSPECTION THIS IS A SUBSTANDARD CODE VIOLATION FOUND IN CHAPTER 8 AND 19 NEW ANSWER IS, HAZARDOUS WIRING AND MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, FAULTY WEATHER PROTECTION AND INADEQUATE EXITS.

SO UNDER CHAPTER 8 FAULTY WEATHER PROTECTION SUBSTANDARD VIOLATION. YOU CAN SEE THE SO GETS ARE EXPOSED AND NOT COVERED UP. UNDER THE DELAP TAX CODE.

IT APPEARS TO BE PAINTED OVER. WINDOWS ARE BOARDED UP WITH NO EXIT POINTS. THERE'S NO METER BOXES SHOWING THE ELECTRICITY HAS NOT BEEN MAINTAINED AND ACCORDING TO THE AEP THERE'S NOT BEEN POWER THERE SINCE JUNE 12TH OF 2015.

>> 15? >> YES, SIR.

SO THE TIME LEADERSHIP SHOWS ON JULY 2021 WE ATTEMPTED TO MEET WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER VIA PHONE CONFERENCE JUST TO SUM THAT UP HE WAS NOT WILLING TO COMPLY AND STATED HE WAS GOING TO REPAIR THE PROPERTIES WHENEVER HE WAS ABLE TO REPAIR THEM AND NOT TRY TO COME MY WITH THE CODE COMPLIANCE RECOMMENDATION SO AS OF SEPTEMBER 20TH THERE STILL HAD BEEN NO ACTION TAKEN BY THE PROPERTY OWNER FOR THE DE DELIPIDATED STRUCTURES AND ON JANUARY 4TH, 2022 WE POSTED A CONDEMNATION NOTICE ON THE STRUCTURE AND WE DID MEET WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER AND SHE EXPRESSED TO FIX THE

[00:15:01]

CONDEMNATION VIOLATIONS. JANUARY 26TH WE FILED ANED AFTER WITH THE COUNTY CLERK AND THEN JANUARY 27TH WE SENT A CONDEMNATION NOTICE TO THE PROPERTY MANAGER AND LEAN HOLDER. I DID RECEIVE A PHONE CALL AND SHE INQUIRED ABOUT TURNING THEM INTO STORAGE UNITS AND WAS SUPPOSED TO SUBMIT A REVIEW OF ACTION AND SHE DID CONFIRM SHE RECEIVED NOTICE FOR TO HEARING AND REMINDED HER TO MAKE SURE SHE BROUGHT ALL THE STRUCTURES IN CONDEMNATION FOR THE PLAN OF ACTION THAT WOULD BE DONE AND SHE WAS ENCOURAGED TO ATTEND THE MEETING TODAY AND SHE IS HERE. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO ORDER THE OWNER TO REPAIR. 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS INCLUDING A TIMEFRAME FOR REPAIR AND COST ESTIMATES AND IF THIS IS DONE 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN HE ROUGH INSPECTIONS, AND IF THIS IS DONE ALL FINAL PLANS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED FOR ALL FINAL

PERMITS. >> HOW MANY TOTAL BUILDINGS ARE

IN THAT COMPLEX? >> I'M NOT SURE OF THE TOTAL BUILDINGS, BUT THE TOTAL BUILDINGS WE CONDEMNED ARE

THREE. >> RIGHT.

I'M AWARE OF THAT. JUST DRIVING THAT PARTICULAR AREA, THERE WERE, I BELIEVE AT LEAST THREE ADDITIONAL BUILDINGS THAT HAD BOARDED WINDOWS UP. NOT ALL OF THEM WERE BOARD BUT THEY APPEAR TO BE VACANT, AS WELL, SO JUST ON 1/2 OF THAT COMPLEX THERE'S AT LEAST, I BELIEVE I'M CORRECT, SEVEN BUILDINGS THAT ARE VACANT AND HAVE AT LEAST SOME WINDOWS BOARDED UP. MY QUESTION IS FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY. THIS IS THE FIRST CASE I REMEMBER THAT'S EVER BEEN BROUGHT TO US AT LEAST WITH MY TIME ON THE BOARD WHERE WE HAVE MULTIPLE UNITS WITHIN ONE COMPLEX. USUALLY IT IS A SINGLE DWELLING OR ONE DUPLEX THAT SOMEONE OWNS ET CETERA OR ONE BUILDING WITHIN THAT ONE BUILDING. WE HAVE THREE SEPARATE CASES HERE TODAY, BUT YET THERE ARE MULTIPLE BUILDINGS ON THIS PARTICULAR CAMPUS THAT ARE VACANT, THAT HAVE BOARDED UP WINDOWS, AND THAT ARE IN FRANKLY A VERY SAD STATE OF REPAIRS.

WHY TO WE NEED TO CONSIDER THESE SEPARATE? WHY NOT CONSIDER THEM AS ONE PROPERTY DEALING AT ONE TIME AND RAISE THE QUESTION ABOUT THIS OWNER ACTUALLY MEETING ANY RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE CITY AND TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TO THE

RESIDENT? >> I THINK THEY ARE DIFFERENT LOTS. THAT'S CORRECT.

THEY ARE DIFFERENT LOT, SO WE HAVE ALWAYS, WE HAVE NEVER COMBINED LOTS PER CASE SO IN THAT WAY IF ONE PROPERTY IS A LITTLE REPAIRED AND ANOTHER ONE IS NOT, YOU'LL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TREAT IT DIFFERENTLY.

WE JUST THOUGHT IT WAS THE MOST EFFICIENT WAY.

THEY EVER IS MORE THAN ONE WAY TO DO THINGS, BUT WE SEPARATED THEM OUT BECAUSE IT'S DIFFERENT LOTS.

>> SO IT'S TRADITION AND NOT LAW?

>> I WOULD SAY IT DOES GO BACK TO LAW, BUT IT'S TOO COMPLICATED TO GET INTO NOW. I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND AN HOUR GOING THROUGH POSSIBLE REASONS. I MEAN WE DID LOOK AT THIS AND I DO THINK THAT IT IS BASED ON LAW, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT I HAVE A COMPLETE ANSWER FOR YOU NOW.

>> OKAY BECAUSE THE QUESTION IS THERE ARE MULTIPLE UNITS OUT THERE WITH ISSUES. NOT JUST THE ONES BROUGHT HERE.

AND IN A CASE WHERE AN OWNER HAS NOT EXPRESSED ANY MAJOR INTEREST OR SHOWN MUCH ABILITY AND I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE TO ADDRESS THAT, BUT JUST MY CONCERN THAT THERE'S A LARGER ISSUE THAN JUST THESE THREE SEPARATE LOTS AT THIS PARTICULAR

COMPLEX. >> RIGHT AND THAT'S NOT REALLY A LEGAL QUESTION. I MEAN STAFF HAS GONE OUT TO INSPECT THESE PROPERTIES AND DETERMINE WHICH ONES SHOULD BE CONDEMNED AND WHICH SHOULD NOT BE SO THAT MAY BE A QUESTION FOR

STAFF. >> I CAN ANSWER THAT FOR YOU DR.

PARIS, THERE ARE OTHER VACANT PROPERTIES IN A DELIPIDATED STATE AND THEY ARE CURRENTLY BEING UNDER THE NUISANCE VIOLATIONS. WE HAVE NOT OFFICIALLY CONDEMNED THOSE YET BECAUSE AS STATED THE PROPERTY MANAGER HAS EXPRESSED A WILLINGNESS TO COOPERATE AND SHE'S INFORMED US THAT SHE'S

[00:20:01]

BEEN GIVEN A LITTLE MORE AUTHORITY TO MAKE DECISION, SO IT MIGHT NOT BE ALL THE ONE'S YOU HAVE IN QUESTION, BUT THERE ARE SEVERAL PROPERTIES OUT THERE BEING WORKED UNDER DELIPIDATED

STRUCTURES. >> THANK YOU.

>> I'M IN FAVOR OF THE PROPERTIES BEING SEPARATED INDIVIDUALLY BECAUSE IT OFFERS THE OWNER MORE FLEXIBILITY SO IF WE'RE GOING TO SIT AND HELP THE OWNER AS MUCH AS WE CAN THAT GIVES THE OWNER MORE FLEXIBILITY.

COULD YOU DO ME A FAVOR AND BAK BACKUP FOUR? I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE BRIEF. THE PROPERTY OWNER DID NOT AGREE

WITH THE PROPOSAL? >> YES, SIR.

>> WITH WHAT? >> WE MET WITH THE PROPERTY MANAGER AND THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS ON A CONFERENCE CALL WITH US. WE EXPLAINED ON THERE THAT WE WOULD ALLOW THEM TO A CHANCE TO PULL PERMITS AND AS LONG AS THE PROPER PAPERWORK WAS TURNED IN IF YOU DID THAT IT WOULD BE MORE LENIENCY FOR THEM IN ORDER TO REPAIR.

HE JUST WASN'T WILLING TO COOPERATE WITH THAT.

>> OKAY. AND THEN THAT PROPERTY OWNER IS AT A DIFFERENT PROPERTY OWNER THAN THE ONE WE SPOKE TO

IN-PERSON? >> NO, SIR.

>> THAT PERSON CAME UP FROM FLORIDA?

>> NO, SIR. THE PERSON YOU SPOKE TO IS THE PERSON HERE TODAY. SHE'S THE PROPERTY MANAGER.

>> SO YOU SENT IT OUT ON JANUARY 27TH.

3060. 60 IS NOT?

>> WELL 30 DAYS. >> SO IT'S DRIVEN BY THE 30-DAY?

>> YES. >> YES.

>> SHE HAS BEEN IN CONTACT BECAUSE SHE'S INQUIRED ABOUT TURNING THEM INTO STORAGE UNIT BUT REGARDLESS WHAT DIRECTION THEY GO WE STILL NEED A PLAN OF ACTION.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> THE FIRST CONTACT BACK IN JULY OF 2021. WHICH WE JUST DISCUSSED HERE AND THE SECOND CONTACT IS IN SEPTEMBER AND IT INDICATES THERE WAS A COMPLAINT. DID THIS FIRE OCCUR BETWEEN JULY

6TH AND SEPTEMBER 30 SNT >> THAT'S INFORMATION WE DID NOT OBTAIN. IT COULD BE REFERRING TO THE PROPERTY THAT I JUST SHOWED THAT HAD SUSTAINED FIRE DAMAGE.

WE CAN GET ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THAT, BUT WE HAD JUST RECEIVED MULTIPLE COMPLAINTS REGARDING COMPLEX IT SELL SOMETHING THAT PROMPTS US TO GO OUT AND GET THIS PROCESS

STARTED. >> WHETHER WERE THE COMPLAINTS FROM THE TENANTS IS IN OTHER STRUCTURES THERE?

>> TENANTS AND ALSO, FROM ABILENE POLICE OFFICER AND WE HAVE SOMEONE HERE THAT CAN TOUCH ON THAT IF YA'LL ARE SO

INCLINED. >> OKAY.

I SSEE JUST A LOT OF ISSUE IN THIS AND COMING AT THIS FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE ONE OF THE CODE VIOLATIONS WOULD BE, IF I UNDERSTAND, THERE WAS DISCUSSION TO TURN THIS INTO, INSTEAD OF AN APARTMENT UNIT INTO A STORAGE

UNIT? >> YES, SIR.

>> OKAY IN A CONDEMNED STATE, CAN THAT CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY OCCUR AND IT MAY BE MORE DIRECTED TO OUR CODE OFFICIALS BEFORE SOME RESOLVE OF SETTLING HOW IT CAN COME OUT OF CONDEMNATION AND CHANGE USE TYPE, OR FUNCTION TYPE.

>> YES, SIR. THAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THE BUILDING OFFICIAL AND THEY INSTRUCTED THAT REGARDLESS, A PLAN OF ACTION IS NEEDED SO THEY NEED TO SUBMIT THE PLAN OF ACTION AND FLOOR PLANS ON WHAT THEY IN TED TO DO AND THAT STILL NEEDS AN APPROVAL FROM THEM. RIGHT NOW BASICALLY IS WHAT THEY'RE WAITING ON IS THE PLAN OF ACTION.

>> SO THAT PLAN OF ACTION AND WE'RE UNDER THE 30-DAY PERIOD HAS LAPSEED SO THIS IS ONE OF THESE CASES THAT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO BE CONSCIENCE OF. WE'RE NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT THE 60 DAY PORTION OF THE 30/60. WE HAVE LAPSEED THE 30-DAY

[00:25:01]

WITHOUT A PLAN OF ACTION, AND WITH THIS CASE IN TURNING IT INTO A STORAGE COMPLEX, IT IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW ALL THE PROCEEDINGS REQUIRED BY THE PLAN OF ACTION MEETING MAN'S AND EXPECTATIONS OF WHAT IT'S GOING TO BECOME.

I UNDERSTAND YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A LOT OF MECHANICAL AND YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A LOT OF PLUMBING IF IT IS TO BECOME A STORAGE UNIT, BUT CAN JUST SAYING I'M GOING TO PUT STUFF IN IT EXIST WITH PARTIAL MECHANICAL PARTIAL PLUMBING THAT'S NOT LITERALLY BEEN REMOVED OR IS PART OF THE PLAN OF ACTION IS THE CITY GOING TO REQUIRE REMOVING ALL OF THAT AND MAYBE TURNING THIS RIGHT BACK, INSTEAD OF HAVING IT, I WANT IT BOTH WAYS.

I'M GOING TO STORE STUFF IN IT IN THE FUTURE, AND THEN THE OWNER TRY TO PUT SOME PEOPLE IN IT.

I FEAR THAT'S WHAT THIS IS LOOKING LIKE IT'S TURNING INTO.

>> SO AND THAT'S WHERE THE FLOOR PLAN AND THE PLAN OF ACTION COMES INTO PLAY. IT WILL BE THOROUGHLY REVIEWED BY PLANNING AND ZONING AS WELL. THE PERMIT PROCESS GOES THROUGH AN ENTIRE PROCESS. THEY MAKE SURE THAT THE WORK BEING DONE IS NOT VIOLATING ANY ZONING VIOLATIONS, AS WELL.

ALL THAT GETS CHECKED BEFORE THE BUILDING OFFICIAL GIVES THE FINAL STAMP OF APPROVAL. SO I THINK THAT WOULD ALLEVIATE THE CONCERN OF POSSIBLY MOVING RESIDENTS IN THERE BECAUSE AT THE END TO OF DAY IT STILL NEEDS TO PASS INSPECTIONS BY THE BUILDING INSPECTORS AND THEY MIGHT PASS THE INSPECTIONS FOR A STORAGE UNIT BUT IF IT'S NOT THERE FOR A RESIDENTIAL UNIT THAT'S WHEN WE'LL MAKE SURE THE OWNER ARE AWARE OF THAT AND IF THAT DOES HAPPEN THEN WE WOULD TAKE ACTION ON IT.

>> RIGHT. SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I SEE THIS EVOLVING IS WE'RE GOING TO SEE A LOT OF TECHNICALITIES THAT'S GOT TO BE OVERSEEN AND ENFORCED PROPERLY AND I'M JUST HOPING THAT THE OWNER WILL BE MADE CLEAR THAT THINGS ARE NOT AS SIMPLE AS ONE WOULD THINK. I WANT TO PUT CHAIRS AND OTHER FURNITURE IN IT BECAUSE BOARDING UP THE WINDOWS UNDER A RESIDENCE. BOARDING UP WINDOWS.

WINDOWS ARE EXITS AND WITH THEM BEING BOARDED UP, THAT'S WHERE YOU DO HAVE NOT SUFFICIENT EXITING IN A RESIDENCE, BUT YET FOR STORAGE IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE ALRIGHT, LIKE YOU SAID.

SO THAT BEING SAID, I JUST WANT THE BOARD TO UNDERSTAND, MAN, WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS TO WATCH OUT FOR, AND IF THEY'RE STORAGE UNITS, THERE'S DIFFERENT FIRE REQUIREMENTS THAT UNDER AN OCCUPANCY AND THERE'S ALL OF THOSE THINGS WE HAVE TO WATCH

OUT FOR. >> AND THAT'S WHY AT THIS POINT THE ONUS IS ON THE OWNER TO GIVE US PLANS AS TO HOW THEY'RE GOING TO USE SO IT YEAH. JUST LIKE YOU ARE SAYING WE'RE EITHER GOING TO LOOK AT IT AS AN'S 1 AND IT CAN BE CONDITIONED SPACE SO THEY CAN HAVE THE MECHANICAL.

>> YES, IT CAN BE. >> OF COURSE IF IT IS AN R, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT EMERGENCY EGRESS AND ALL THE WINDOWS WOULD HAVE TO BE A CERTAIN SIZE AND OPERABLE AND SO FORTH.

SO WE NEED THEIR DIRECTION SO WE CAN DO OUR JOB AND GIVE THEM

DIRECTION. >> IS THE PROPERTIES AND LOTS

ZONED? >> THERE ARE ALREADY SOME STRUCTURES THERE USED FOR STORAGE.

>> OKAY. >> THEY DIDN'T INITIALLY START OUT AS RESIDENCE. THEY WERE ACTUALLY STORAGE

FACILITIES. >> SO THAT MULTI USE APPLICABLE

THERE. >> LET'S SEE HOW THIS GOES.

>> YES. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF MR. S?

>> AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ITEM.

[00:30:08]

ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STEP FORWARD AND

STATE YOUR NAME AND FOR RECORD. >> I'M ALICIA GORDON.

SORRY. MAY NAME IS ALICIA JORDAN AND

TIME PROPERTY MANAGER. >> WHAT'S YOUR ADDRESS?

>> 16 SOUTH LEGGETT DRIVE. >> IS THAT WHERE YOU LIVE?

>> NO. I LIVE IN ANNISTON.

THAT'S THE OFFICE. BEEN WITH JOSH ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT THINGS. I HAVE GOT WITH THE OWNER AND HE'S DOES GOT SOMEBODY ON STAND BY TO START PULLING PERMITS AND TO TEAR THINGS OUT COMPLETELY AND GO BACK IN AND TAKE OUT THE RISERS AND THE ELECTRICITY AND ALL THE PLUMBING TO MAKE IT A STORAGE UNIT ON SEVERAL DIFFERENT ONES.

>> OKAY. SO YOUR GOAL IS FOR IT TO BE A

STORAGE UNIT. >> WE PLAN TO PUT ALL NEW ROOFS AD FIXING THE STRUCTURAL WALLS LIKE YOU'RE SUPPOSE AND TAKING OUT ALL THE WINDOWS EXCEPT FOR THE TWO IN THE FRONT AND WE'LL BEAM IN THE REST OF SO IT IT'S JUST ONE BUILDING.

>> WHAT'S YOUR TIMEFRAME? >> MY GUY SAID HE CAN HAVE ONE DONE IN TWO MONTHS AND HE'S ASKING FOR A TOTAL OF SIX MONTHS

TO GET IT COMPLETELY DONE. >> ALL OF THEM?

>> ALL THREE. YES, SIR.

>> ARE THERE SOME PHYSICAL PLAN PLANS, GRAPHIC DRAWINGS OR THAT SORT OF THING?

>> HE'S WORKING ON THOSE NOW AND HE WILL HAVE IT UP-TO-DATE, BUT I GUESS AT THE NEXT MEETING I WILL HAVE EVERYTHING OR INTO THE

PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD. >> OKAY.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF THIS. >> MA'AM, THERE ARE MULTIPLE OTHER BUILDINGS OUT THERE THAT ARE EMPTY.

WHAT'S YOUR CURRENT OCCUPANCY RATE FOR THAT COMPLEX?

>> 24 PERCENT VACANCY. >> SO IT'S 76 PERCENT?

>> I HAVE 140 UNITS OUT THERE SO I HAVE 82, NO, 109 OCCUPANCY OUT

THERE. >> OKAY.

OKAY. BUT THERE ARE YOU THERE BUILDINGS THAT ARE CURRENTLY EMPTY AND DO HAVE AT LEAST SOME WINDOWS THAT ARE BOARDED UP, CORRECT?

>> ARE YOU? WE DO HAVE SOME UP THERE WITH BOARDS, BUT THAT'S WHERE SOME AC UNITS GO INTO.

NOT COMPLETELY BOARDED UP JUST WHERE THE WINDOW IS CUT OUT AND

THE AIR CONDITIONER GOES IN. >> WOULD THE PLAN BE SORT OF PENDING THE CITY EVALUATION TO TURN THOSE INTO STORAGE UNITS?

>> NO. WE PLAN, ONCE WE GET THIS ALL FIXED AND DONE WITH, THEN WE WANT TO START WORKING ON THE OTHER ONES. I HAVE STARTED WORKING ON SOME OF THEM WITH THE BOARDS IN IT FOR THE AC.

WE ARE AFTER WE GET IT COMPLETELY DONE INSIDE WE'LL HAVE A PERMIT PULLED TO RELEASE THE MEETER SO WE CAN GET THOSE

RENTED. >> THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> YES, SIR.

>> THE CITY'S RECOMMENDING TO GIVE YOU 30 DAYS TO TALK TO THEM AND PULL THE PERMITS AND GIVE THEM PLANS.

WILL THAT WORK FOR YOU? >> YES.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHERS WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STATE YOUR

NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> GOOD MORNING.

GENRE MY RESOLUTION THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT WITH THE ABILENE POLICE DEPARTMENT. MY ADDRESS IS 4550 LONESOME DOVE. IN 2021 WE RECEIVED NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS FROM NEIGHBORS OF THE PROPERTIES REGARDING TRAFFIC IN AND OUT OF THE PROPERTIES, AS WELL AS WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD FROM CODE ENFORCEMENT SO WE STARTED TO WORK WITH CODE LAST YEAR.

WE DID SOME OPERATIONS OURSELVES AS FAR AS THE CRIMINAL ASPECT AND I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH MRS. JORDAN TO TRY TO GET HER COOPERATION WITH SOME OF THE TENANTS THERE AND I CAN'T STATE SHE HAS BEEN COOPERATIVE WITH US IN THAT.

IN 2021 THERE WERE 268 CALLS ON THESE ACTUAL PROPERTIES SO NOT

[00:35:10]

AT THESE SIX ADDRESSES, BUT THE ACTUAL PROPERTY AS A WHOLE.

THOSE CALLS CAN RANGE FROM MEDICAL CALLS UP TO A HOMICIDE THAT THEY HAD THERE IN OCTOBER OF 2021.

I WANT TO GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF HOW MANY CALLS WE ACTUALLY HAVE IN THIS AREA. IT'S A VERY SMALL AREA, BUT THEY STILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CALL, SO I WANTED TO JUST OFFER YOU THE ACTUAL OPPORTUNITY TO ASK QUESTIONS ON THE CRIMINAL ASPECT. IF I CAN ANSWER THAT I WILL AND SHOW THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH CODE IN TRYING TO GET THE ISSUES

RESOLVED. >> SO IN YOUR OPINION, YOU FEEL LIKE THE EXTREME THING IS NUISANCE AND CONDEMNATION AND DEMOLITION, BUT WORKING WITH THEM AND TRYING TO CONCERT THINGS INTO BETTER STATES OF USE DO YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS THE RIGHT PLAN TO KEEP PROCEEDING WITH? BECAUSE THIS FIRST UNIT AND TURNING IT INTO STORAGE IS EVIDENTLY GOING TO BE OUR PROTOTYPE, YOU MIGHT SAY.

>> SURE. >> AND IF WE ARE GOING TO THEN CONTINUE ON THE NEXT THREE UNIT HAS THE ARE THE IN THIS PACKAGE, YOU MIGHT CALL IT A PACKAGE TODAY, ARE WE ON THE RIGHT TRACK THEN? AND I RECOGNIZE YOUR REPORTING

THE FACTS OF THE CASES. >> YES, SIR.

>> SO YOU ARE GOING TO MONITOR THIS NO DOUBT.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> WE'LL SEE IF THE CRIME EVENTS LEASEE NEVER. WE ARE ON A GOOD PATH TO KEEP

PROCEEDING. >> I DO THINK THAT THE PATH IS ACTUALLY POSITIVE AND AGAIN I'VE HAD SOME POSITIVE INTERACTIONS WITH THE PROPERTY MANAGER. I DO HAVE CONCERN WITH HOW MUCH HER INFLUENCE CAN GO. SHE CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH AND IT WILL BE UP TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE NOT SEEN AS MUCH COOPERATION ON OUR END.

>> OKAY. >> THANK YOU.

>> SO YOU CAN LIVE WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION?

>> THAT'S A TOUGH ANSWER. I DON'T LIVE IN THE AREA.

I KNOW FROM A CRIMINAL AREA THIS WOULD NOT AFFECT THE RESPONSE FROM THE ABILENE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

CHANGING THESE INTO STORAGE UNITS WOULD ACTUALLY BE BENEFICIAL FOR THE PROPERTY. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH IMPACT IT

WOULD HAVE ON THE CRIME ASPECT. >> SO YOUR BEHAVIOR, EXCUSE ME, THE OWNER'S BEHAVIOR, AT LEAST EARLY BEHAVE REFUSING TO DO ANYTHING AND THREATENING TO TURN THAT OVER TO HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE YOU HAD ABOUT THAT SAME LEVEL OF COOPERATION?

>> I'VE HAD, SO I HAD BEEN EXPLAINED THAT THROUGH THE PROPERTY MANAGER, AS WELL AS THROUGH CODE.

I HAVE NOT PERSONALLY ATTEMPTED TO SPEAK WITH HIM.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE CRIMINAL ASPECTS WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ANY CONTACT WITH HIM BECAUSE HE'S NOT IN THE AREA, BUT IT HAS BEEN MY UNDERSTANDING FROM PROPERTY MANAGER, AS WELL AS CODE IT'S BEEN EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO GET A LOT

ACCOMPLISHED. >> I THINK YOUR POINT IS WELL TAKEN THAT THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH THAT THE MANAGER CAN DO AND ULTIMATELY IT IS THE OWNER OF A PROPERTY LIKE THAT BECAUSE THAT'S THE REASON WHY I AM SO CONCERNED ABOUT LOOKING ONLY AT TWO PROPERTIES AT A TIME RATHER THAN LOOKING AT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY AND I DEEPLY APPRECIATE YOU REPORTING THIS BECAUSE THE FACT IS THAT THE STATISTICS THAT YOU ARE REPORTING IS THAT THIS IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE. THE PROPERTY IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND IT IS A HIGH CRIME, DANGEROUS AREA THAT AS LONG AS WE PIECEMEAL THIS, WE'RE NOT REALLY ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM AT ALL IN MY VIEW. SO I THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION. THANK YOU.

>> CAN YOU TELL US WHAT PERCENT OF THE CALLS WERE VIOLENT?

>> I DO NOT HAVE THAT PERCENTAGE BUT I CAN SAY THERE HAVE BEEN, THERE HAS BEEN A HOMICIDE AND SOME ROBBERIES AND THERE HAS BEEN SOMEING AGGRAVATED OFFENSES OF THAT NATURE.

I DON'T HAVE EXACT NUMBER. >> THANK YOU.

[00:40:03]

>> YES, SIR. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHERS WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STEP FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

SEEING NO ONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 21-00456 AND OPEN THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION FOR A MOTION.

>> THIS WILL NOT SURPRISE ANYONE, BUT MY VIEW IS THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ARE FAR SHORT CITED.

FOR THIS ENTIRE COMPLEX AND NOT JUST TWO BUILDINGS AND WITH THE PUBLIC RISK INVOLVED WITH THIS PRO PROPERTY, I THINK THE BUILDING SHOULD BE TORN DOWN.

I'M SORRY. THIS IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE NOT TWO BUILDINGS NUISANCE AND I THINK WE'RE JUST PLAYING GAMES IF WE SIMPLY SAY WE'RE JUST GOING TO TURN TWO BUILDINGS INTO STO STORAGE.

>> THE ISSUE OF DEALING WITH THESE AS INDIVIDUAL AND US HAVING ON SCHEDULE TODAY A SENSE OF SEEING AN OUTCOME OF THIS AS KIND OF A THREE ITEM, AGAIN I SAID IT EARLIER, PACKAGE.

I'D LIKE TO RESERVE TIME TO SEE THE OTHER TWO AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN DO THIS. CAN YOU TABLE SOMETHING AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING AND UNABLE IT AND FINISH IT LATER IN

THIS MEETING? >> WE COULD, BUT -

>> I JUST NEED MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS COMPLEX AND TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING WHERE WE THINK WE'RE HEADED.

ALSO TO HELP THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

PICKING AT THIS LIKE WE HEAR ONE AT A TIME, WE DON'T HAVE THE

BEST PICTURE OF IT. >> WELL EVEN IF YOU ARE HEARING ONE AT A TIME YOU CAN ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE COMPLEX AS A WHOLE. IT DOESN'T KEEP YOU FROM FINDING OUT ALL YOU WANT TO THE A THIS POINT.

>> I DON'T NECESSARILY WANT TO TEAR IT DOWN NOW BUT BY THE END OF THIS MORNING I MAY SAY TEAR IT DOWN.

AND I DON'T WANT TO NECESSARILY PASS ANOTHER 30/60 TO NOT BRING

IT BACK. >> IT DOES NEED TO BE BASED ON THIS PROPERTY TOO AND WE DO NEED TO TAKE THEM LOT AND

CASE-BY-CASE. >> OKAY.

>> CAN I COMMENT? >> YES.

>> JUST TO DR. PARIS, JUST TO KIND OF GIVE OUR STRATEGY.

THIS IS A BIG COMPLEX. AND SO AS WE GO OVER THERE YOU GUYS HAVE BEEN WORKING THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

WE WENT OVER TWO OR THREE MONTHS AGO AND WALKED THE WHOLE

COMPLEX. >> OKAY.

>> SO WE SAW WHAT WE SAW. WE CAME BACK AND SAT DOWN AND WENT OKAY, HOW ARE WE GOING TO ATTACK THIS.

>> OKAY. >> SO OBVIOUS LAY BULLDOZER AND DOING THE WHOLE COMPLEX WAS NOT AN OPTION FROM LEGAL STANDPOINTS. WE CAN'T DO THAT.

SO ONE OF THE STRATEGIES WE CAME UP WITH IS THE ONE SET BEFORE BABY STEP PROCESS.ME SORT OF A - IF WE CAN GO AND ATTACK THREE OF THEM AND GET THEM TO COMPLY, GET THEM TO FIX IT, GET THEM TO DEMOLITION IT. WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, THEN WE ATTACK THE NEXT ONE. AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE'RE TAKING THESE TO THIS BOARD, THEY ARE WORKING WITH THE DELAP ACCOMODATION ASPECT OF IT. GET SOME PAINT ON IT.

GET SOME WOOD OFF THE WINDOWS. SO WE HAVE THREE SORT OF BRING THIS PROPERTY TO SOME SORT OF COMPLIANCE.

[00:45:04]

IS IT THE RIGHT STRATEGY? I DON'T KNOW.

THAT'S BEFORE YA'LL. YA'LL CAN MAKE THAT DECISION, BUT THAT'S THE STRATEGY IN THE MINDSET THAT WE CAME UP WITH TO TRY AND AT LEAST GET THIS THING ROLLING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, NOW WILL THESE THREE BE TAKEN CARE OF? WE DON'T KNOW THAT. THAT'S WHY WE ARE HERE.

YA'LL GIVE THE ORDER, AND IF IT DOES, THAT'S GREAT AND WE CAN MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE. IF IT'S NOT THE 30/60 WE BRING YOU BACK AND TEAR THEM DOWN. SO THAT'S THE STRATEGY THAT WE CAME ONE, RIGHT WRONG OR INDIFFERENT THAT'S BEEN PUT BEFORE YOU AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY.

>> COULD YOU GIVE ME A QUICK PREVIEW? ARE WE TRYING TO TURN THE NEXT TWO CASES INTO STORAGE UNIT?

>> I THINK THE EXACT SAME STRATEGY IS FOR THE OTHER TWO,

AS WELL. >> AND WE'RE GOING TO SEE MAPS ON HOW THESE ARE DISPERSED THROUGHOUT THE COMPLEX?

>> YES, SIR. >> SO THAT'S, WHENEVER I WAS REVIEWING THINGS I WAS BEGINNING TO THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHERE THIS WAS GOING BECAUSE OF HOW THEY WERE SCATTERED OUT.

JOSH, YOU DID A GREAT JOB EXPLAINING WHAT HE COULD EXPLAIN, BUT IT'S LIKE READING AN INSTRUCTION BOOK TO HOW TO TEAR INTO A COMPUTER OR SOMETHING.

YOU KNOW I JUST NEED SOMEBODY TO TELL ME HOW TO DO IT SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE TO DO TODAY, BUT I COULDN'T PIECE EVERYTHING TOG TOGE TOGETHER, SO I STILL HAVE THE IDEA THAT I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M READY TO TEAR IT DOWN UNTIL I SEE THESE BROUGHT IN SOME FASHION TO RESERVE THE RIGHT TO GO BACK TO NUMBER 1 OR IT'S JUST GOING TO TAKE A LONGER AND AS YOU SAID, IT'S BABY STEPS.

>> CAN I MAKE A STATEMENT? I THINK THEY'RE APPLES AND ORANGES SO CRIME IS NOT ALWAYS BECAUSE OF LOCATION, IT'S BECAUSE OF OPPORTUNITY. SO BEING IN THE BOARD OF BUILDING STANDARDS AND STICKING TO THE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND YOUR RECOMMENDATION THAT THE OWNERS ALREADY SAID THAT THE PROPERTY MANAGER SAID THEY CAN WORK WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND IT'S WITHIN THEIR SCOPE SO BY CULTIVATING A POSITIVE ATTITUDE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND THE OWNER AND CREATING BETTER ENVIRONMENT FOR EVERYONE LESSONS CRIME AND TAKES THAT OPPORTUNITY AWAY AS APPOSED TO KNOCKING A BUILDING DOWN.

KNOCKING A BUILDING DOWN IS NOT GOING TO TAKEAWAY CRIME.

TAKING A WAY OPPORTUNITY TAKES AWAY CRIME SO I THINK STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS SPOT ON BECAUSE IT SUPPORTS THE CITY AND IT SUPPORTS THE OWNER AND IT SUPPORTS THE POSITIVE ATTITUDE TO HELP LEGAL ENFORCEMENT CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT AND OPPORTUNITY TO LESSEN CRIME SO I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE

STAFF RECOMMENDATION. >> I WOULD SECOND THAT MOTION.

>> MY CONCERN IS THE OVERALL COMMITMENT FROM THE OWNER.

MAKING THIS PLACE PRESENTABLE AND A PLACE WHERE OPPORTUNITY FOR CRIME IS NON-EXISTENT. HE'S OBVIOUSLY BY THE OVERALL CONDITION OF THE COMPLEX, LIKE DR. PARIS SAYS, KIND OF DEMONSTRATING TO ME THE OWNER'S COMMITMENT SOMEWHAT LACKING BY KEEPING THIS STUFF IN GOOD REPAIR.

I DON'T WANT TO IN ANYWAY JEOPARDIZE THE CURRENT RESIDENTS AND WHAT WE DO HERE CAN AFFECT THEM EVEN THOUGH, THEIR PROPERTIES ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE OWNERSHIP COMMITMENT AND I HOPE YOU CONVEY THAT TO THE OWNERSHIP ABOUT THIS BOARD'S CONCERNS. WITH THAT BEING SAID THERE IS A MOTION BY MR. WEBB AND SECONDED BY MR. MASK BRIAR THAT WE FOLLOW THE 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN PERMITS AND PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION INCLUDING A TIMEFRAME FOR REPAIR AND COST ESTIMATE.

[00:50:04]

>> BEFORE YOU GO FURTHER I WANT TO CONFIRM.

YOU DID CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> OH. OKAY.

SORRY. >> I APOLOGIZE.

>> AT THIS TIME I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 21-0004456. I THOUGHT I THOUGHT I DID THAT. TO ORDER THE OWNER TO REPAIR, 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION INCLUDING A TIME FRAME FOR REPAIR AND COST ESTIMATES, AND IF THIS IS DONE, 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN ROUGH IN INSPECTIONS, AND IF THIS IS DONE ALL FINAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE EXPIRATION OF ALL PERMITS.

>> ROLL CALL. >> AND I WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO THAT CONVERSATION OF, WE AS A BOARD REALLY HAVE GOT TO LEAN ON OUR STAFF AND WE WANT THE COMMITMENT FROM THE STAFF TO FOLLOW UP ON THIS AND BRING IT BACK TO US AS SOON AS IT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT BACK OR MANAGE IT TO THE POINT THAT IT'S GOING IN WITH THESE BABY STEPS AND WE DON'T HAVE TO HEAR ABOUT IT, AND IF TODAY'S ACTIONS AND THIS BEING THE FIRST ITEM OF THIS, OUR SECOND AND THIRD ITEMS, I THINK WE'LL GO QUICKER AND THEN IF OTHERS NEED TO BE BROUGHT BACK IN THIS OVERALL CONCEPT AND PLAN, I'M FINE WITH PROCEEDING IN THIS FASHION AS LONG AS STAFF THAT'S AGREED TO UPHOLD THIS, THEN I THINK THE BOARD CAN

RELAX. >> ROLL CALL PLEASE?

>> DR. PARIS? >> I WOULD SIMPLY SAY THAT I BELIEVE THE BOARD'S DECISION TODAY IS TOTALLY INADEQUATE.

I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY, THIS IS TOTALLY INADEQUATE.

TURNING THIS PLACE INTO STORAGE UNITS DOES NOTHING ABOUT THE CRIME THAT EXISTS OUT THERE. MY VOTE IS ABSOLUTELY NOT.

>> MR. MCBRAIR? >> YES.

>> MR. WEBB? >> YES.

>> MR. TURNER? >> YES.

>> MR. SCHROEDER? >> I'M HESITANT, BUT I'LL GO

YES. >> MR. BEARD?

[C. Case for Rehabilitation, Demolition, or Civil Penalties - Case No. 21-004459: 3933/3937 Lynwood Ln. (ELMWOOD WEST, SEC D, BLOCK N1/2 OF 4, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS), Owner: Kuruvila Joe Trustee of the 610 S. Leggett Dr. Land Trust]

>> YES. >> MOTION PASSES.

>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT CASE? NEXT CASE ON THE AGENDA IS CASE CASE NUMBER 21-004459: 3933/3937 LYNWOOD LANE. ELMWOOD WEST, SECTION D, BLOCK N1/2 OF FOUR, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS. THIS IS GOING TO BE SIMILAR TO THE PREVIOUS PRESENTATION. RECORD SEARCH OF THE WARRANTY DEED AND LEAN HOLDER AND ALL THE INFORMATION REMAINS THE SAME, AS WELL AS THE UTILITY RECORDS AND THERE WERE NO RECORDS FOUND FOR THIS STRUCTURE HOWEVER ACCORDING TO THE AEP, UTILITIES HAVE NOT BEEN ACTIVE WITH NO METER SINCE JUNE 25TH OF 2009.

AGAIN THIS IS AN AERIAL OF THE COMPLEX IN QUESTION.

YOU HAVE THE MAIN OFFICE THERE AT THE BOTTOM AND THE UNIT IN QUESTION AT THE TOP. THIS IS A PUBLIC NOTICE FOR TODAY'S HEARING. HERE'S THE FRONT AND NORTH SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. THE REAR SOUTHSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. THE WEST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.

AND THE EAST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.

UPON THE INSPECTION THESE WERE THE SUBSTANDARD CODE VIOLATION UNDER CHAPTER 18 AND 19. INADEQUATE SANITATION.

NUISANCE, HAZARDOUS WIRING AND PLUMBING AND FAULTY WEATHER PROTECTION. UNDER HAZARDOUS WIRE WE HAVE NO METER BOXES ON THE RIGHT AND LOOSE WIRES ON THE LEFT.

DELIPIDATED STRUCTURE CODE. WE HAVE YOU CAN SEE THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT YOU HAVE THE SO GET AND ANYTHING JUST RIPPED APART AND YOU HAVE ROOFING ISSUES ON THE LEFT.

HAZARDOUS PLUMBING VIOLATION. NO GAS METER IS LOOKED UP.

[00:55:07]

FAULTY WEATHER PROTECTION. COLLAPSED CEILING AND THERE IS WHOLE RIGHT THROUGH THE CEILING OR THE ROOF AND INADEQUATE SANITATION AND THERE'S NO PROPER SINKS OR TOILETS PROPERLY MAINTAINED SO THE TIME-LINE OF EVENTS IS THE SAME GIVEN THAT THESE ARE ALL THE PROPERTIES A FOUL ONE COMPLEX AND THE RECOMMENDATION ALSO IS THE SAME. STAFF INVESTIGATION ORDER THE OWNER TO REPAIR AND HAVE 30 DAYS AND HAVE A PLAN OF ACTION.

TO ORDER THE OWNER TO REPAIR, 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION INCLUDING A TIME FRAME FOR REPAIR AND COST ESTIMATES, AND IF THIS IS DONE, 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN ROUGH IN INSPECTIONS, AND IF THIS IS DONE ALL FINAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE EXPIRATION OF ALL

PERMITS. >> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU. I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE STEP FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR

NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> MY NAME IS ALICIA JORDAN AND TIME PROPERTY MANAGER AND LIVE IN ANSON, TEXAS AND WE PLAN TOO TURN THIS ONE AND ANOTHER ONE INTO A STORAGE UNIT.

WE PLAN ON GUTTING EVERYTHING OUT AND GETTING THE RISES MOVE AND NEW ROOF AND SIDE WALL TO TURN IT INTO A STORAGE UNIT.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHERS WISHING TO SPEAK STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> DAVID, CAN I ASK A QUESTION OF MRS. JORDAN?

>> CAN YOU STEP BACK TO THE MICROPHONE.

>> THIS MAY NOT BE SPECIFICALLY GERMAINE TO THIS, BUT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT CONCERTING THESE TO STORAGE UNITS.

ARE THESE GOING TO BE RENTED TO THE TENANT?

>> NO SIR, MAINLY FOR THE COMPANY.

WE HAVE LAWNMOWERS AND GENERATORS AND STUFF LIKE TKATCHEV WE HAVE IN OUR OFFICE AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GOING TO STORE THAT. PAINT SUPPLIES AND STUFF LIKE THAT TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY AND EVERYTHING.

>> AND BEFORE YOU LEAVE, IS PART OF YOUR MAN OF ACTION THAT THESE WERE ORIGINALLY DUPLEX TYPE ARRANGEMENTS.

ARE YOU MAKING ENTIRE THING ONE STORAGE?

>> YES, SIR. WE'LL KNOCK OUT THE MIDDLE WALL AND MAKE IT ONE STORAGE WITH TWO DOORS.

>> IS THERE APROXIMATE SQUARE FOOTAGE?

>> I KNOW WHAT ONE UNIT IS. 864 SQUARE FEET.

>> SO THIS WOULD BE 16? >> YES.

>> 1720. OKAY.

THAT'S UNDER 2,000 SQUARE FEET. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE.

>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. I'M VERY SENSITIVE TO THE OTHER OBSERVATIONS BY THE BOARD AND SO THE METHOD MIND MY MADNESS IS BY STARTING THE TIME-LINE HERE THAT YOU ARE AWARE OF THAT'S THE QUESTION. YOU AWARE OF THAT BECAUSE WE HAVE MADE THIS MOTION

NOW THE TIMELINE HAS STARTED? >> YES.

>> SO NOW YOU HAVE 30 DAYS AND ONCE YOU SEE ACTIVITY GOING IT WILL CREATE A BETTER ATMOSPHERE. BUT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WHAT WE CAN TO HELP YOU AND HELP THE COMMITTEE AND DO EVERYTHING THAT

WE CAN. >> YES, SIR.

I PLAN ON BY THE END OF THE DAY ENTERING MY PLANNING AND ZONING STUFF TO THEM AND I HAVE MY ROOFERS ON STAND BY BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE COULD TOUCH IT BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY CONDEMNED

SO THEIR READY TO PULL PERMITS. >> TIME-LINE HAS STARTED.

>> YES, SIR. >> DO YOU MIND STATEING FOR THE RECORD HOW MANY ACTIVE STORAGE UNITS YOU HAVE ON THE PROPERTY

RIGHT NOW? >> I HAVE NONE.

>> SO THEY DID APPROVE THIS AND YOU DID COMPLY THIS WOULD GIVE

YOU THREE STORAGE UNITS? >> YES.

>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHERS WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE COME FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SEEING NO ONE I'LL CLOSE TO HEARING ON THE CASE AND OPEN THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION.

OR A MOTION. DUPLICATION OF THE PREVIOUS

CASE. >> CAN I SAV-A-LOT OF TIME FOR

THIS COMMITTEE AND SAY, DITTO. >> MOTION BY DR. PARIS.

[01:00:04]

>> NOT A MOTION JUST A COMMENT. DITTO.

I HAVE NOT ADDED ANY MORE COMMENTS THAT THEY HAVE NOT CHANGED ABOUT THIS PROPERTY. WE'RE FAILING.

WE ARE FAILING IF WE DO NOT ADDRESS THIS AS ONE ENTIRE PROPERTY. I DON'T KNOW IF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE DRIVEN THIS PROPERTY. I THINK THE IDEA OF WHAT THE POLICE HAVE REPORTED TO US ABOUT THE INDIVIDUALS, THIS ACTION THAT WE'RE TAKING TODAY WILL NOT DO ANYTHING TO ADDRESS THE PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES THAT THIS PROPERTY PRESENTS.

>> IS THERE A MOTION? >> NOT QUITE.

I'D LIKE TO SEE THIS MAP OF THE COMPLEX FOR THIS CASE IF WE CAN BA BACK UP TO THE GOOGLE MAP? ALRIGHT. CAN YOU ORIENT FOR ME WHERE IS

LEGGETT DRIVE? >> SO IT'S VERTICAL.

>> AND THIS DOES NOT REPRESENT THE ENTIRE COMPLEX.

WHERE THE YELLOW CIRCLE IS, THAT'S THE OFFICE.

AS PREVIOUS WE HAD IT ZOOMED OUT A LITTLE MORE AND THE OTHER UNIT WAS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS ONE?

>> NO, SIR IT WAS FURTHER TO THE RIGHT.

>> TO THE RIGHT. >> YES, SIR.

>> SO ANTICIPATING THE THIRD STORAGE UNIT, CAN ANYBODY DEFINE FOR ME THAT IS THE THIRD UNIT THAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT

ON THIS PICTURE? >> NO SIR.

IT'S FURTHER UP. >> IT'S FURTHER UP?

>> YES. >> SO THE THREE STORAGE UNITS ARE DISPERSED THROUGHOUT THIS COMPLEX MORE OR LESS?

>> SHOULD THE APPROVAL GO THROUGH AND MANAGER AND OWNER

COMPLIES, YES, SIR. >> TO THE THIRD.

>> WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE TWO ON LYNNWOOD BECAUSE THOSE ARE ON THE SAME LOT, BUT YES, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.

>> RIGHT. NOW I'M GOING BACK TO THE LOTS AND THE PROPERTIES, IF YOU WILL, THIS IS REALLY, IS THIS REALLY PROPERTIES, MULTIPLE OR A PROPERTY? I ASK KIND OF THAT BECAUSE OF HOW IS IT PLATTED AND WHAT DO WE HAVE IN THE WAY OF THAT KIND OF RESEARCH AND MAYBE THAT WOULD BE A STAFF CODE, I AM JUST TRYING TO GET THE BIGGER PICTURE.

I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE SEEN A GOOGLE AERIAL DEPICTED THIS WAY. I DO HAVE IT PROBABLY ON MY

PHONE. >> SO IF I MAY, WE DID REVIEW THE ENTIRE THING UNDER OUR GIS MAP AND WE DID GET AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY COMPLEX SO I CAN CONFIRM IF YOU LOOK UP TO THE TOP WHERE THE CIRCLE IS, THE UNIT IS CIRCLED IN RED ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BOTTOM ONE AND LOOK AT THE ENTIRE THING AND THAT'S ONE LOT RIGHT THERE AND SOME OF THE LOTS SIT ON SOUTH LEGGETT DRIVE AND SOME ON SADDLE WOOD AND SOME ON LYNNWOOD LANE, BUT THAT'S PLATED FOR ONE LOT RIGHT THERE AND IT IS ZONED FOR MULTIPLE STRUCTURES.

>> OKAY. >> THAT'S HOW.

>> SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THESE UNITS AND WE'RE INDIVIDUALIZING THEM AND THE BOARD IS HEARING EVERY UNIT IS NOT IT'S OWN PROPERTY SO TECHNICALLY HOW MANY LOTS? DR. PARIS IS TRYING TO GET TO THE FRONT END OF THIS AND I'M TRYING TO SEE THE WHOLE THING AND I'VE YET TO GET TO

UNDERSTAND THAT. >> SO -

>> ALL I'M GETTING SAT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS THING THROUGH A DRINK STRAW AND WE'RE PICKING AT IT.

FOR THE COMFORT LEVEL WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THESE, THIS IS THE

[01:05:04]

SECOND ONE AND THERE'S TO BE A THIRD ONE.

IS THAT ALL THE STORAGE UNITS YOU'RE GOING TO NEED? AND THE REST WILL BE REHABILITATEED?

>> WAIT UNTIL WE OPEN THE ITEM AGAIN AND SHE CAN ADDRESS THAT

QUESTION. >> OKAY I CAN DO THAT.

>> JUST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION AS BEST AS I CAN, NOT A DEFINITE FIGURE BOW BALLPARK IF YOU LOOK AT THE LOT YOU HAVE TEN STRUCTURES ON THERE AND AS MRS. JORDAN STATED SHE HAS OVER 140 UNIT, SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT LEAST 14 LOTS FOR THE ENTIRE AREA GIVE OR TAKE. MAYBE LESS IF THERE'S MORE THAN TEN ON ONE LOT BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE ARE LARGER THAN OTHERS.

>> SO IN THE BOARD DISCUSSION? >> YES.

>> MAY I? MA'AM? WE GOT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ONLINE AND THE OWER AND THE CITY ONLINE AND THE THING HERE IS TIME.

SO THE SOONER THAT WE CAN GET THIS GOING AND THE PLAN OF ACTION INSTITUTED THE SOONER THEY GET FIXED AND YOU CAN REDUCE THE CRIME AND WE GET EVERYBODY ROLLING ON ONE VOICE ON THIS. THAT'S WHY I MAKE THE MOTION TO

ACCEPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. >> I SECOND THAT.

>> JUST A SECOND HERE. >> YOU'RE SHAKING YOUR HEAD?

>> NO. >> YES, YOU ARE.

>> GO AHEAD. I WASN'T SAYING ANYTHING.

>> COULD YOU DESCRIBE THE LOT? ARE YOU THROUGH? COULD YOU DESCRIBE THE LOT ON THIS PICTURE HERE? YOU MENTIONED THE ONE CIRCLED IN RED IS THAT THE ENTIRE RIGHT

SIDE OF THE PICTURE ONE LOT? >> YES, SIR IF YOU COUNT THE STRUCTURES THERE'S TEN BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, UNITS ON

THAT ONE LOT. >> SO THIS IS, THE QUESTION IS TO MR. WATSON, WERE WE TRADITIONALLY IF WE HAVE DEMOLITION ORDER IT'S EVERYTHING ON THE LOT?

IS THAT CORRECT? >> THESE HAVE THEIR OWN ADDRESS SO THAT WAS PART OF THE DISCUSSION.

WHAT DO WE DO? WE HAVE A WHOLE LOT, BUT WE HAVE MULTIPLE UNITS ON THAT LOT. WE HAVE RESIDENCES WITH STORAGE BUILDINGS AND WE HAVE DEMOLITIONED THEM.

NOT ALL THE STRUCTURES ON THE LOT, SO WITH THESE HAVING, THERE'S DOUBLE ADDRESS, WE CAN CLEARLY IDENTIFIED WHICH STRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE DEMOLISHED.

>> OKAY. >> SO IF WE DEMOLISH OR WE HAVE A DEMOLITION ORDER THAT DOES NOT INVOLVE THE OTHER LOT?

>> JUST LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENT.

WE DEMO'D STORAGE BUILDINGS. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> YEP.

>> MOTION BY MR. WEBB AND SECONDED BY MR. MASK BRIAR THAT THE OWNER HAS ORDERED TO ORDER THE OWNER TO REPAIR, 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION INCLUDING A TIME FRAME FOR REPAIR AND COST ESTIMATES, AND IF THIS IS DONE, 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN ROUGH IN INSPECTIONS, AND IF THIS IS DONE ALL FINAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE EXPIRATION OF ALL PERMITS.

ROLL CALL. >> DR. PARIS?

>> NO. >> MR. MCBRAIR?

>> YES. >> MR. WEBB?

>> YES. >> MR. TURNER?

>> YES. >> MR. SCHROEDER?

>> YES. >> MR. BEARD?

[D. Case for Rehabilitation, Demolition, or Civil Penalties - Case No. 21-004463: 410/412 S. Leggett Dr. (ELMWOOD WEST, SEC C, BLOCK 3, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS), Owner: Kuruvila Joe Trustee of the 610 S. Leggett Dr. Land Trust]

>> YES. >> MOTION PASSES.

>> NEXT CASE, PLEASE? >> SO THE THIRD CASE FOR THIS COMPLEX IS CASE NO. 21-004463: 410/412 SOUTH LEGGETT DRIVE.

ELMWOOD WEST, SECTION C, BLOCK 3, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS. SO AGAIN THE CHECKLIST SHOWS THE SAME OWNER AND LEAN HOLDER AND FOR THE DAY LOOR COUNTY RECORDS, AS WELL.

NO ENTITY UNDER THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND DUE TO THE ONE METER

[01:10:05]

SERVICING MULTIPLE METERS AND THEP RECORD ON THIS ONE, THERE'S BEEN NO METER OR ACTIVE POWER AS OF FEBRUARY 26TH OF 2008.

>> 208? >> YES, SIR.08?

>> YES, SIR. THIS IS THE GOOGLE AERIAL VIEW.

THIS IS ACTUALLY BETTER PICTURE OF ALMOST THE ENTIRE COMPLEX.

IF YOU LOOK AGAIN THE BOTTOM YOU HAVE THE OFFICE, THE MAIN OFFICE AND THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION. 410, 412 SOUTH LEGGETT DRIVE.

THERE'S THE FRONT EAST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.

THE REAR WEST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE.

NORTH SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. AND THE SOUTHSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. SO THESE ARE CODE VIOLATIONS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED UNDER CHAPTER 8 AND 19.

NUISANCE, HAZARDOUS ELECTRICAL WIRING AND PLUMBING AND INADEQUATE EXITS. HAZARDOUS WIRING IDENTIFIED AS LOOSE WIRES TO THE LEFT AND NO METER BOXES.

NUISANCE VIOLATION UNDER CHAPTER 19, DELIPIDATION CODE.

MISSING SIDING AND THE BOARD AT THE BOTTOM IS LOOSE AND FALLING OFF. HAZARDOUS PLUMBING.

AGAIN NOT BEING MAINTAINED AND NO METERS LOOKED UP.

AND INADEQUATE EXITS AS YOU SAW THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE BOARDED UP. SO AGAIN SAME TIME-LINE OF EVENTS AND SAME COMMUNICATION WITH THE OWNER FOR THIS PROPERTY, AS WELL. SAME RECOMMENDATION IS 30 DAYS AND 40 DAYS. TO ORDER THE OWNER TO REPAIR, 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION INCLUDING A TIME FRAME FOR REPAIR AND COST ESTIMATES, AND IF THIS IS DONE, 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN ROUGH IN INSPECTIONS, AND IF THIS IS DONE ALL FINAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE EXPIRATION OF ALL PERMITS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS? >> WOULD YOU BRING THE PICTURE

BACKUP PLEASE? >> YES, SIR.

>> OF THE ENTIRE COMPLEX? COLLEAGUING I'LL BE VERY BRIEF.

WE'RE DEALING WITH THREE SEPARATE BUILDINGS TODAY.

YOU MENTIONED THE OTHER BUILDINGS ON THIS PROPERTY WERE UNDER DELIPIDATED STRUCTURES. CAN YOU GIVE ME THE IDEA OF THE NUMBER OF THOSE BUILDINGS THAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE UNDER

DELIPIDATED STRUCTURES? >> SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 20 AND 30 THAT ARE UNDER VIOLATIONS SO THERE'S CASES FOR EACH ONE OF

THOSE. >> SO SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 20 AND 30. LET'S USE THE CONSERVATIVE NUMBER OF 20. 23 BUILDINGS THAT ARE CONSIDERED

SUBSTANDARD? >> YES.

THOSE THAT ARE SOME OF THOSE CASES ARE NOT VACANT.

WE OPENED THE DELIPIDATED STRUCTURES ON SOME OCCUPIED, AS

WELL. >> MY NEXT QUESTION, WELL I'LL SAVE MY NEXT QUESTION. SO OVER HALF THESE PROPERTIES, OVER HALF OF THIS QUOTE PROPERTY IS IN UNDER DELIPIDATED STRUCTURES AND THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THEY ARE SAFE OR NOT.

SO MY QUESTION IS, THE OWNER ORIGINALLY STATED THAT HE WOULD NOT DO ANYTHING AND HE WOULD TURN IT OVER TO THE FOLKS? HE HAS NOT BEEN RESPONSIVE TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT REQUESTS.

>> YES, SIR. >> OKAY.

JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT POINT. THANK YOU.

>> YES, SIR. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> DOES THIS SITE AERIAL REPRESENT 100% OF THE PROPERTIES, THE LOTS? OR IS IT FURTHER DOWN HERE AND A LITTLE BIT OVER OR A LITTLE BIT UP?

>> SO WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO IDENTIFY THE STREET THAT AS LITTLE FURTHER TO THE - YEAH TO THE WEST THERE, IT'S HARD.

>> I RECOGNIZE WILL DON JUAN IS AT THE TOPS.

THAT THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY? >> YES, SIR.

>> THEN WE HAVE LEGGETT DRIVE DOWN THE MIDDLE AND THEN WE HAVE THIS KIND OF LOOP THAT'S RED BUD CIRCLE.

THERE'S NOTHING AFTER THAT ALLEY.

>> NOW, SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I BELIEVE THERE IS

[01:15:01]

FURTHERMORE BECAUSE I RECOGNIZE BOTTOM STREET THAT'S WHITTIER AND THERE'S SOME LOTS ON THAT STREET, AS WELL.

>> OKAY. Y YES, THE LITTLE SHOPPING STRIP, DOES IT START?

>> IT STARTS FURTHER DOWN. >> IT STARTS SOMEWHERE FURTHER DOWN. THERE ARE UNITS ON BOTH SIDES OF LEGGETT DRIVE ALL THE WAY DOWN AND THERE APPEARS TO BE A BIG GRASS AREA, IS THERE UNITS IN THIS BOTTOM?

>> NO, SIR. >> OKAY.

>> LET ME OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND MAYBE YOU CAN ASK

MRS. JORDAN THAT QUESTION. >> OKAY.

>> AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AN CASE 21-004463. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AGAIN PLEASE.

>> MY NAME IS ALICIA JORDAN AND PROPERTY MANAGER FOR DECOY PROPERTIES AND I LIVE IN ANSON TEXAS AND WE NEED STORAGE UNITS AND WE'RE GOING TO DO THE SAME TO ALL THREE.

IT WILL BE LIKE TRIPLETS. THE EXACT SAME THING.

THE GENTLEMEN WAS ASKING WHY OUR OFFICE IS RIGHT THERE WITH THE YELLOW? THAT'S WHERE OUR PROPERTY ENDS ON THAT SIDE AND THEN ON THE EAST SIDE WE HAVE WHITTIER AND WE GO DOWN UNTIL IT HITS THE 3800 BLOCK OF WHITTIER AND THAT

STARTS THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. >> OKAY.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >> SO IS THIS REPRESENTING TWO THIRDS OF YOUR PROPERTY? ONE, TWO, THREE?

>> YES. >> IF IT'S KIND OF BLOCKED THAT W WAY.

AND I DON'T KNOW HOW THE LOTS ARE DEFINED, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THERE MIGHT BE SIX LOTS RIGHT HERE?

>> YES. >> AND THEN YOU HAVE THE

REMAINDER LOTS? >> ACROSS THE STREET.

CROSS WHITTIER AND THERE COULD BE ONE OR TWO IN THAT?

>> WELL THERE'S FIVE OR SIX BUILDINGS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF

WHITTIER. >> ONLY SIX BUILDINGS.

>> YES. >> SO THAT ONE LOT?

>> IT'S DIFFERENT SECTION PARTS. >> WELL I'M JUST TRYING TO GRASP IT. NOW STORAGE UNITS.

WELL I SNEAKED A QUESTION TO YOU EARLIER.

WE HAVE THE RED ONE HERE AND ALSO, ON THIS MAP THE OTHER TWO WOULD REALLY SHOW UP. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, SIR. >> WHERE THE RED IS CIRCLED UP

THERE AT THE TOP. >> WE HAVE ONE HERE?

>> NO, SIR. ON UP.

RIGHT THERE. >> WE HAVE THIS TO BECOME ONE?

>> YES. >> AND THEN DOWN THE STREET OF

LYNNWOOD. >> LYNNWOOD?

>> ON THE CORNER. KEEP GOING.

>> THAT'S PARKING. >> YES.

>> AM I CLOSE? >> YES.

>> OKAY. SO IS THE BOARD FOLLOWING.

WE HAVE THIS ONE IN RED CIRCLED. WHAT IS THE SECOND ONE?

>> RIGHT THERE ABOVE YOUR FINGER.

ON UP. >> THAT ONE.

THERE. THERE.

HERE. IN THIS ONE LOT WE HAVE THREE

STORAGE UNITS? >> YES.

>> AND YOU DON'T NEED ANYMORE STORAGE UNITS?

>> BECAUSE ONE WE'RE GOING TO USE FOR LAWN EQUIPMENT AND WEED EATERS AND SHEET ROCK AND PAINT AND THE OTHER ONE MISCELLANEOUS STUFF LIKE FILING CABINETS AND PAPERWORK FROM THE OFFICE.

>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF MRS.

JORDAN? >> NO.

>> MRS. JORDAN THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY EVEN THOUGH, I'M OBVIOUSLY APPOSED AND THINK THAT YOUR PLAN IS TOTALLY INADEQUATE I RECOGNIZE YOUR POSITION AS AN EMPLOYEE OF AN

[01:20:03]

OWNER WHO HAS BEEN LESS THAN RESPONSIVE AND I PERSONALLY THANK YOU FOR YOUR COURAGE AND THE WAY YOU'VE HANDLED YOURSELF TODAY. I THANK YOU PERSONALLY FOR THAT.

I JUST HAVE ONE MORE QUICK QUESTION.

AT THE LOWER PORTION THERE, I SEE THREE ROOFS THAT HAVE TARPS ON THEM. HOW LONG HAVE THOSE ROOFS HAD

TARPS ON THEM? >> THAT'S ACTUALLY AN OLD PICTURE. WE HAD ALL OF THOSE REROOFED.

>> AWESOME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> YES, SIR. >> ANY OTHERS WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STEP FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SEEING NO ONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 21-004463.

HAD PLENTY OF DISCUSSION HERE. IS THERE A MOTION?

>> YOU WANT ME TO DO IT AGAIN? >> MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. TO ORDER THE OWNER TO REPAIR, 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION INCLUDING A TIME FRAME FOR REPAIR AND COST ESTIMATES, AND IF THIS IS DONE, 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN ROUGH IN INSPECTIONS, AND IF THIS IS DONE ALL FINAL INSPECTIONS SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE EXPIRATION OF ALL PERMITS.

>> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> MOTION BY MR. TURNER AND SECONDED BY MR. WEBB THAT THE OWNER IS ORDERED 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION INCLUDING A TIMEFRAME FOR REPAIR AND COST ESTIMATES, AND IF THAT IS DONE, 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN ROUGH INSPECTIONS, AND IF THAT IS DONE ALL FINAL INSPECTIONS SHOULD BE COMPLETED BY THE EXPIRATION OF ALL PERMITS. ROLL CALL, PLEASE?

>> DR. PARIS? >> NO.

>> MR. MCBRAIR? >> YES.

>> MR. WEBB? >> YES.

>> MR. TURNER? >> YES.

>> MR. SCHROEDER? >> YES.

[E. Case for Rehabilitation, Demolition, or Civil Penalties - Case No. 21-004567: 1509 Truman St. (E70 W609 LT 25 SIDNEY SMITH, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS), Owner: Gonzales Joe Ozuna Jr]

>> MR. BEARD? >> YES.

>> NEXT CASE? >> ALRIGHT.

FINAL CASE ON THE AGENDA IS CASE NUMBER 21-004567: 1509 TRUMAN STREET. E70 W609 LT 25 SIDNEY SMITH, TAYLOR COUNTY, TEXAS. SO THE CHECKLIST FOR THE RECORD SHOWS COUNTY RECORDS WITH A SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED NAMING GONZALES AS THE OWNER AND HE'S THE OWNER. SECRETARY OF STATE SHOWS NO ENTITY UNDER THAT NAME. TAX RECORDS ARE NOT APPLICABLE OF THE MUNICIPALITY. INACTIVITY OF AUGUST SINCE 2005 AND THE SEARCH REVEALS HIM TO BE THE OWNER.

JOE OZUNA GONZALES, JR.. THIS IS TUB LICK NOTICE POSTED FOR TODAY'S HEARING. THIS IS THE FRONT AND NORTH SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. THE REAR SOUTHSIDE OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE EAST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE WEST SIDE OF THE STRUCTURE. SO UPON THE INSPECTION THESE WERE THE SUBSTANDARD CODE VIOLATION FOUND UNDER 8 AND 19 TO BE IN EXISTENCE. STRUCTURAL HAZARDS.

NUISANCE, FAULTY WEATHER PROTECTION AND FAULTY MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION AND INADEQUATE EXITS.

SO THIS IS THE FAULTY WEATHER VIOLATION IDENTIFIED.

YOU SEE THERE'S NO SIDING TO PROTECT THE STRUCTURE FROM ANY WEATHER. THIS IS THE DELIPIDATION FOUND IN CHAPTER 19 NUISANCE CODE. THIS IS A STRUCTURAL HAZARD AND YOU SEE INADEQUATE FOUNDATION SO I'M SORRY, LET ME EXPLAIN THE DOUBLE PHOTOGRAPHS. SO THIS PROPERTY WAS INITIALLY KIND OF LOOKED AT IN DECEMBER OF 2021 SO FROM DECEMBER OF 2021 UP TO FEBRUARY 11TH OF 2022 YOU SEE THERE ARE SOME MAYBE ADJUSTMENTS OR CHANGES MADE TO THE AREA OF THE STRUCTURE IN QUESTION BUT YOU CAN SEE IT'S STILL A HAZARD AND YOU CAN SEE AGAIN ON THE RIGHT IN DECEMBER AND THE LEFT WITH THE METAL SKIRTING.

THIS IS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AND YOU SEE THERE'S NO PROPER EXIT POINT. JUST A STEPLADDER THERE.

INADEQUATE EXITS IN THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY, AS WELL.

FAULTY MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION SO YOU SEE THIS WAS CONFIRMED WITH THE BUILDING INSPECTORS AND THIS IS AN IN PROPER USE TO SECURE A FOUNDATION. HAZARDOUS ELECTRICAL WIRING AND THIS APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME AND THE PHOTOGRAPH ON THE LEFT SHOWS THE WIRES THAT ARE STILL JUST LAYING THERE ON THE FLOOR. AND MORE HAZARDOUS WIRING ON THE

[01:25:04]

STRUCTURE AND LOOSE WIRES TO THE LEFT AND TO THE RIGHT EXPOSED OUTLETS. SO THE TIMELINE OF EVENTS FOR THIS STRUCTURE IS APRIL 16TH REPORTED TO US SMALL COMMERCIAL BUILDING HAD BEEN RELOCATED AND THE BILLING INSPECTOR TO MAKE SURE THE BUILDING WAS PROPERLY ZONED FOR THAT.

OCTOBER 13 THIS WAS WORKED IN THE DELIPIDATED STRUCTURE PROGRAM AND ON OCTOBER 28TH THE OWNER SAID HE HAD AN ACTIVE PERMIT AND THAT WAS CONFIRMED TO NOT BE TRUE AND HE STATED HE WAS GOING TO LOWER THE BUILDING AND CLEAN THE LOT.

ON NOVEMBER FIRST A NUISANCE CASE WAS OPENED FOR UNSIGHTLY CONDITIONS AND NOVEMBER 30TH THERE WAS NO PROGRESS MADE TO THE BUILD AND THE PROPERTY WAS APPROVED FOR CONDEMNATION.

ON DECEMBER 2ND THE ZONING CASE OPENED DUE TO THE INDIVIDUAL OF INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN TRAILERS AND WE POSTED THE CONDEMNATION AND RECORDED THE AFFIDAVIT WITH THE COUNTY CLERK AND ON DECEMBER THIRD THOSE WERE SENT. DECEMBER 20TH HAND DELIVERED COPIES WERE GIVEN TO THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE DECEMBER 2ND THE OWNER CAME TO GET CLARIFICATION AND WAS EXPLAINED ABOUT THE PERMITTING PROCESS. ON JANUARY 21ST THE GIRL FRIEND DELIVERED A PLAN OF ACTION THAT WAS NOT COMPLETE AND THERE WAS NO FLOOR PLAN WITH THE PLAN OF ACTION SO ON THE 28TH, THE SAME INDIVIDUAL DID NOT RETURN FOR CONTACT FROM THE OWNER OR INDIVIDUAL SAYING SHE WOULD COME BACK TO PROVIDE THE DOCUMENTS.

ON FEBRUARY 10TH IT WITH US CONFIRMED WITH PLANNING AND ZONING THEY HAD NOT BEEN INVOLVED WITH ANYTHING AT THIS PROPERTY AND WE REPOSTED DUE TO THE NOTICE OF CONDEMNATION DUE TIGHT BEING RIPPED OFF. THE PROPERTY OWNER WAS NOT COOPERATIVE AND WE NOTICED THE MODIFICATIONS MADE TO THE STRUCTURE SINCE DECEMBER AND HE WAS REMINDED THAT NOTHING COULD B DONE UNLESS PERMITS WERE PULLED.

SO ACCORDING TO OUR FINDINGS STAFF RECOMMENDS THIS PROPERTY IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND IS HAZARD AND THE REPAIR OF THE STRUCTURE WOULD BE UNREASONABLE SO WE FURTHER RECOMMEND THE OWNER DEMOLISH OR THE CITY MAY DEMOLISH WITHIN 30 DAYS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS? >> MR. MORRIS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK, BUT THE FIRST DAY YOU HAD THERE WAS IN APRIL OF LAST

YEAR, IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES, SIR.

>> SOME TIME PRIOR TO THAT THIS STRUCTURE HAD BEEN MOVED ON TO THIS PROPERTY AND SAT ON THIS FOUNDATION THAT WE SAW, IS THAT

CORRECT? >> YES, SIR.

>> SHOULD THERE NOT HAVE BEEN SOME SORT OF PERMIT APPLIED FOR AND RECEIVED BEFORE THAT ACTION HAPPENED?

>> YES, SIR. >> SO HE WAS IN VIOLATION FROM

THE START ON THIS? >> YES, THAT'S CORRECT AND I WANTED TO SHARE A COUPLE OF OF DATES, AS WELL.

THERE WAS A REPORT OF A VEHICLE FIRE ON MAY NINTH OF 2021.

AND JUST TO GIVE BRIEF DETAILS IT WAS A VEHICLE THAT CAUGHT FIRE AND THE OWNER WAS NOT ON THE SCENE AND IT WAS DETERMINED ACCIDENTAL FROM THE USE OF A CUTTING TORCH AND ON JANUARY 19TH OF 2022 THERE WAS A STRUCTURE FIRE INITIATED AND FURTHER INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED AND THE DISCOVERY WAS AGAIN THAT IT WAS CAUSED BY A CUTTING TORCH AND AGAIN BEING ACCIDENTAL AND WE HAVE RECENTLY RECEIVED A COMPLAINT, NOT SURE OF THE DATE, BUT IT WAS SOME TIME THIS WEEK FROM THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNER AT 1517 TRUMAN OF ITEMS IN OTHER VEHICLES AND TRAILERS BEING MOVED OVER ON TO HIS LOT SO HE'S STEPPING OVER HIS PROPERTY LINE AND THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED.

WITH THAT PROPERTY OWNER. >> HAS PLANNING AND ZONING

ISSUES BEEN RESOLVED? >> IT IS JUST CONFIRMED.

I BELIEVE IT SHOULDN'T BE ZONED FOR A RESIDENT SOME THE

STRUCTURE NEEDS TO BE REMOVED. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF MR.

MORRIS? >> THANK YOU.

AT THIS TIME I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 21-004567 AND OPEN THE FLOOR TO ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE

[01:30:01]

PLEASE STEP FORWARD AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE

RECORD. >> YES, SIR. I'M JOE GONZALEZ ABOUT THAT PROPERTY FROM THE STAPLES BACK IN 2017.

I HAD TWO HOUSES ALREADY BEFORE THAT.

I'M ONE MAN PERSON. I'M DIVORCED AND DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY. I MOVED THAT BUILDING.

EXCUSE ME. I GOT THAT OLD BUILDING AND HAD IT MOVED TO MY PROPERTY WITH THE LAWYER SAYING HE HAD THE PERMIT THAT WE MISUNDERSTOOD EACH OTHER AND HE SAID I HAVE THE PERMIT.

HE HAD THE PERMIT TO LOAD IT UP IN THE 18-WHEELER TO GET IT ON THE STREET AND NOT ON THE PROPERTY, SEE SO WE HAD A MISUNDERSTANDING RIGHT THERE. ANYWAY THEY CALL IT THE HOUSE ON STILTS AND WANTED, IT DON'T LOOK LIKE THAT PICTURE NOW.

I'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET IT CLEANED UP.

BEFORE I GO I WANT TO LEAVE SOMETHING BEHIND.

I'M JUST DOING MY BEST. THEY'VE A CRAZY SON THAT I'M TRYING TO CORRECT, BUT THAT'S HARD TO DO.

I CAN'T SAY MUCH. MY MOTHER PASSED AWAY IN SEPTEMBER. I JUST WENT TO CRAPS, YOU KNOW? I'M JUST TRYING TO GET BACKUP. I TALK TO MY NEIGHBORS AND THEY SAID THEY DON'T HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH IT.

JUST TO GET BACK ON YOUR FEET SO I'M DOING MY BEST.

THAT'S ALL I CAN TELL YOU. >> WHAT IS YOUR INTENTION FOR THE BUILDING? TO MAKE IT A RESIDENCE?

>> THIS GUY SAID IT'S WAS BUNKYS OLD BUILDING AND HAS BATHROOMS AND I WANTED TO FOLLOW THE CODE WHAT I HAVE TO DO TO GET IT DONE. IT IS A FIVE INCH SLAB ON THE BOTTOM AND TWO INCH ROOF AND IT IS A SOLID PIECE.

ALL METAL STUDS. STRONG HOUSE.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SET IT DOWN WHEREVER THEY WANT ME TO DO IT SO I'LL FOLLOW THEIR RULES. BUT RIGHT NOW NO CONCRETE.

I'M A CONCRETE GUY. JUST POUR CONCRETE.

A LITTLE SLOW, BUT HOPEFULLY IT WILL PICK UP AND I CAN GET BACK

ON MY FEET. >> WHAT IS YOUR FUTURE PLAN FOR LEAVING IT IN THE AIR LIKE IT IS?

>> NO. I WILL LOWER IT DOWN, BUT IT'S A FLOOD ZONE, SO I LIKE TO KEEP IT UP BECAUSE WHEN IT RAINS IT COMES TO JOURNEYS, SO I WANT EVERYTHING UP JUST A HAIR, BUT I'LL FOLLOW WHAT THEY WANT ME TO DO.

>> SO IT HAS A CONCRETE FLOOR IN IT NOW?

>> YES. FIVE INCH CONCRETE SLAB AND 2.5 INCH CEILING. IT IS A SOLID ROCK.

>> AND IT CURRENTLY IS NOT ANCHORED DOWN?

IT'S JUST ON BLOCK? >> YES.

THEY CALL IT THE HOUSE ON STILTS.

I WILL FOLLOW WHAT THEY WANT. THEY GO FIVE FEET WITH BEAMS AND 6-FOOT BEAMS IT DOESN'T MATTER, BUT I WANT TOO FOLLOW WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT. I WANT EVERYTHING IN THE AIR NOT

ON THE FLOOR. >> WHAT IS YOU'RE AN THIS PARTICIPATED TIMEFRAME FOR GETTING IT ON A FOUNDATION?

>> MAN, RIGHT NOW I'M NOT SAYING.

I GOT TO HAVE AT LEAST NINE MONTHS JUST TO GET THE SLAB LOWERED DOWN. IT IS JUST A ONE MAN ARMY RIGHT NOW. THE FIRE, YES.

ALL THAT IS ALL CLEANED UP IF YOU GO SEE IT TODAY, IT DON'T LOOK THE SAME. I HAD A LITTLE BIT OF HELP TO HAVE IT ALL CLEANED UP, BUT LIKE I SAID I'M DOING MY BEST.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BOARD IS GOING TO DO HERE, BUT I DON'T THINK WE CAN GIVE YOU NINE MONTHS.

THAT'S AGAINST THE LAW. >> WHAT'S THE MINIMUM I CAN GET?

>> WELL WE'LL DISCUSS IT IN A MINUTE, BUT ANYBODY HAVE ANY

QUESTIONS OF MR. GONZALES? >> LET ME JUST MAKE IT AN UNDERSTANDING. THE BUILDING STRUCTURE AND I MAY NEED TO LOOK AT PHOTOGRAPHS AGAIN WITH YOU.

CAN WE BACK UP TO JUST A TYPICAL FOUNDATION OR SOMETHING? IS THE STEELE FRAME PART OF THE BUI

[01:35:04]

BUILDING? >> YES, SIR.

>> SO YOU WANT TO KEEP THAT FRAME, BUT PUTTING FOUNDATION, THIS IS A FOUNDATION THE BLOCKING FOR THE TRANSPORT TO BRING IT INTO THIS LOT, IS THAT RIGHT?

>> NO. I BOUGHT IT JUST THE WAY IT WAS

MADE. >> THAT IS THE FOUNDATION?

>> THAT SLAB? YEAH I MEAN EVERYTHING.

>> THIS IS THE BOTTOM SO THIS IS TEMPORARY?

>> YES, SIR. >> AND HOW - THE FLOOR LINE IS

RIGHT HERE AND ARE THESE? >> THAT'S CONCRETE.

ALL THAT RIGHT THERE GOES FIVE INCHES DOWN ALL THAT INSIDE IS

CONCRETE INSIDE OF IT. >> INSIDE THIS IS CONCRETE.

>> YES, SIR. >> DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE LEVEL OF THE FLOODPLAIN, IS THIS GOING TO BE A FOOT OUT OF THE RELEVANT, WELL I CAN SEE THE SITE SLOPES OFF SO YOU'RE GOING TO BRING IT DOWN TO A FOOT OFF OF IT THE GROUND ON ONE SIDE?

>> YES. WHATEVER.

>> THIS IS THE DOOR TO IT? >> NO THAT'S THE BACKSIDE.

>> THAT'S THE BACKSIDE? >> YES, SIR.

>> YOU ARE DROPPING IT DOWN? >> WHATEVER THEY TELL ME.

>> FOR THE BOARD HIS JOB IS SOMEHOW TO LOWER.

>> THAT WILL NOT BE THERE. >> NONE OF THIS WILL BE THERE?

>> THE FOUNDATION AND PUT A BEAM?

>> I WANTED A WALL. A ONE FOOT WALL AROUND IT C.

>> ONE FOOT FRAMER WALL AROUND THE WHOLE THING.

>> WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S REQUIRED UNTIL WE GET HIM TO COME IN AND SIT DOWN AND FIND OUT WHAT HE IS WANTING TO DO.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE ELEVATION WILL BE.

WE DON'T KNOW ANY OF THAT. SIZE AND STUFF.

>> BUT I SEE THE MODULE MORE OR LESS.

IT'S THE STEEL BEAM IS THE BOTTOM OF THE STRUCTURE, YES OR

NO? >> YES.

>> WE CAN ASSUME THAT WILL BE LOWERED AT THE SHALLOW SIDE AND

COULD BE ANOTHER BEAM AND THEN - >> THE FOUNDATION WILL BE REQU REQUIRED.

>> TO WE KNOW THE DIMENSION? >> 931 SQUARE FEET?

>> THIS IS 19? >> YES.

>> AND THAT A LONGER DISTANCE IS?

>> 49. >> 49?

>> THE REASON IT LOOK LIKE THAT BECAUSE THEY HAD OLD-FASHIONED SIDING THAT WEIGHED TOO MUCH FOR THE TRAILER TO CARRY SO WE HAD TO TAKE IT OFF BECAUSE OF THE WEIGHT.

IT COULD HAVE BEEN CLEANER, BUT I WAS WORKING AND HAD TWO MORE HOUSES. I'M JUST ONE PERSON, YOU KNOW?

IT DON'T LOOK LIKE THAT NO MORE. >> OKAY.

>> IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THIS ANYMORE.

CAN YOU DESCRIBE THIS? >> JUST THE OUTSIDE IT'S ALL

COMING DOWN. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT WHAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THIS RIGHT NOW?

>> THE TRASH AND ALL THE STUFF RIGHT THERE IS MOVED.

>> OKAY. >> IT'S CLEANED UP.

IF YOU GO TODAY YOU CAN SEE WHAT I MEAN.

>> ALL THIS ON THE SIDE IS GONE? >> YES.

>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> YOU SAID ALL THE PROPERTY IS CLEANED UP?

[01:40:12]

I WAS OUT THERE YESTERDAY. BUT IT IS NOT CLEANED UP NOW?

>> GO WITH ME TODAY? >> I WAS THERE YESTERDAY

AFTERNOON LATE. >> THAT WAS 24 HOURS AGO.

>> NO IT WASN'T >> WHAT WAS IT?

>> APPROXIMATELY 4:15. >> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU SNOOPING AROUND A LOT. I SEEN YOU A FEW TIME AS TO, BUT

THERE. >> I UNDERSTAND AND I APPRECIATE YOU'RE A TEMPT TO TRY TO CORRECT THAT.

BUT THAT LARGER PROPERTY THERE IS NOT SOMETHING YOU CAN CLEAN

UP FOR A COUPLE OF HOURS. >> NO SIR.

YU GET A LITTLE BIT OF HELP. IT'S ALL RIGHT HERE.

>> YOU'RE THE ONE THAT TOOK THE PICTURE WHEN IT CAUGHT FIRE,

CORRECT? >> RIGHT HERE.

>> LIKE I SAID I'M DOING MY BEST.

I AIN'T PERFECT. >> DO YOU HAVE A PLAN OF ACTION

HERE TO GET WITH THE CITY? >> NO, RIGHT NOW.

THEY SAID THEY'LL GIVE ME A HAND OUT THERE TO GET IT WHATEVER THESE PEOPLE RIGHT HERE WANT ME TO GET BY LAW.

AND START FROM THERE. I CAN'T TELL YOU.

>> THANK YOU MR. GONZALES. ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS CASE PLEASE STEP FORWARD AND GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.

>> I WANT TO CORRECT MYSELF FROM A STATEMENT I MADE EARLIER.

IT WAS CONFIRMED THAT LOT IS ZONED FOR RESIDENTIAL SO IF HE WANTS A RESIDENCE THE PROPERTY HAS TO BE COMPLETED, BUT STAFF

RECOMMENDATION IS THE SAME. >> CAN I QUESTIONED A QUESTION?

>> >> MR. MORRIS?

>> LET ME CLOSE THIS. >> I'M GOOD HERE.

>> AT THIS TIME I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AN CASE 21-004567 AND OPEN THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION.

>> OKAY. >> THIS STRUCTURE SUPPORTING THIS, IT APPEARS MR. GONE SALESS IS COMPETENT TO PUT IT ON THE PEERS LIKE THAT AND THAT LOOKS TO BE UNSTABLE.

IF YOU OR YOUR STAFFRS LIKE THAO BE UNSTABLE.

IF YOU OR YOUR STAFFIRS LIKE TH TO BE UNSTABLE.

IF YOU OR YOUR STAFF INQUIRED OF THAT? THAT'S NOT OFFENSEED OR SECURED. SO THERE'S A CHANCE OF CHILDREN AND ANIMALS PLAYING UNDER THAT THING.

>> THERE'S NO FENCE AND I DID HAVE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR LOOK AT THE PHOTOGRAPHS, AS WELL AND HE SAID THAT IS NOT AN APPROVD OR APPROPRIATE FOUNDATION TO HOLD IT UP.

IT'S UNSTABLE AND IS AN OBSTRUCTION.

>> AN EMINENT ONE. >> YES, SIR.

>> WE ARE VERY CAUTIOUS WHEN WE APPROACH THE STRUCTURE BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT APPEARED TO BE UNSTABLE.

IT APPEARED TO BE AN EMINENT THREAT.

>> BEFORE YOU DID DETERMINE WE'RE GOING TO GIVE HIM 30/60 ON THIS THING, IT APPEARS THE PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE SECURED IMMEDIATELY. TO PREVENT POSSIBLE INJURY ON

TRESPASSERS. >> THAT COULD BE A POSSIBLE TOOL TO DO THAT. BUT THERE'S NO GUARANTEES OF COURSE FROM OUR END WE CAN ENFORCE IT, BUT SECURING IT COULD PREVENT INJURY OR ENTRY ON TO THE LOT.

>> I'LL GO BACK TO MY INITIAL QUESTION.

THIS STRUCTURE IS IN VIOLATION OF THE BUILDING PERMIT

REQUIREMENT? >> YES, SIR.

STOP ORDER WAS PLACED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON THERE.

>> HAVE THERE BEEN ANY PENALTY ASSESSMENTS OR IS THERE

PENALTIES DUE? >> NO SIR WE HAVE NOT HAD TO YET

[01:45:01]

BECAUSE WE WANTED TO ALLOW THE OWNER TIME TO COOPERATE AND GET HIM TO UNDERSTAND AND STATE IN THE TIMELINE SOMETHINGS WERE MADE, BUT IT WAS EXPLAINED DOCUMENT THIS SUBMITTED WERE NOT SUFFICIENT SO WE NEEDED MORE DETAILED PLANS OF ACTION AS REQUIRED FOR EVERY PROPERTY OWN WEAR A CONDEMNATION CASE.

ALL THE CONTRACTORS HAVE BE LICENSED AND CERTIFIED TO ENSURE

THE WORK IS COMPLETED CORRECTLY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MAKE A

MOTION? >> I WOULD ALMOST FEAR KNOCKS THIS DOWN WILL BE A BIGGER HAZARD IT'S SCARY LOOKING.

THE BUILDING ITSELF MIGHT BE STRUCTURALLY SOLID, BUT IT'S

LIKE IT'S UP ON PENCILS. >> AND IF JUST THE CONCEPT OF DEMOLISHING THAT COULD INCLUDE SOMEBODY PICKING IT BACK UP AND REMOVING IT FROM THE LOT. AND CARRYING IT SOMEWHERE.

THEN THE CLEAN UP OF THE FOUNDATION IS THERE.

SCAPES THINGS OFF THE GROUND. I SEE IS NUISANCE.

I WISH IT WAS A BIGGER PROJECT THAN A ONE MAN TEAM.

BUT TO TRUCK SOMETHING INTO THAT, YOU COULDN'T HAVE HAD AN ANYMORE THAN SUB GRADE OR PLUSH TO GRADE FOUNDATIONS IN PLACE AND LOWERED IT DOWN PROPERLY. WELL I SEE THAT, BUT IT'S PROBABLY NOT THE FOUNDATION THAT'S GOING TO PPASS.

>> I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND. >> LET ME REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'LL REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 21-004567, AND IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO HIM PLEASE STEP BACK TO THE MICROPHONE PLEASE? MR. GONZALES?

>> LET'S DO THAT. IF WE WERE NOT TO DEMOLISH IT AND GIVE YOU TIME TO WORK THIS. I HAVE IDEAS THAT DON'T FIT.

DO YOU HAVE A MORE REALISTIC UNDERSTANDING OF HOW YOU CAN DO SOMETHING IN A TIMELY FASHION? YOU SAY THE INSIDE OF IT HAS FINISHES? IT'S LIKE I DON'T GUESS, YOU HAVEN'T BEEN IN IT'S HAVE YOU SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE INSIDE LOOKS LIKE, BUT YOU ARE ACCEPTING IT AS AN ALMOST MOBILE HOME, AND IF IT IS IN TACT AS YOU SAY IT NEEDS TO BE LOWERED

ON TO SOME FOUNDATION. >> THAT'S THE COMPANY DO.

>> IN ORDER TO HAVE ONE PERSON ACCOMPLISH THIS, IT AIN'T GOING

TO HAPPEN. >> NO, SIR, THAT'S WHAT I'M

TALKING ABOUT. >> YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HIRE THINGS OUT. HAVE YOU GOT THE FINANCIAL

ABILITY TOO DO THAT? >> I HAVE HELM FROM FAMILY.

[01:50:09]

I WILL GET HELP ON WHAT IS A LOW THEY MIGHT WANT ME TO GET.

>> THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION SAYS IT IS A NUISANCE AND SHOULD BE TORN DOWN. THEY WANT THE CITY, WELL THEY WANT YOU TO TAKE IT DOWN. IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING ELSE AND I'M FEARFUL OF WHAT I'M SEEING, YOU NEED FINANCIAL ABILITY AND STAFF NEEDS TO FIND OUT IF YOU CAN ACCOMPLISH THIS.

>> YES, SIR, YES I SHE CAN. I KNOW I SHE CAN.

I'M NOT ACQUITTER. OKAY.

GUYS WE MAY BE LOOKING AT A TABLE.

>> ARE YOU DONE WITH MR. GONZALEZ?

>> YES. >> LET ME CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON CASE 21-004567 AND OPEN THE FLOOR.

FOR MORE DISCUSSION. >> OKAY.

>> BEFORE YOU GO I WANT TO CONFIRM AND MAKE SURE THERE SE NO CONFUSION. HE STATED WHERE WE COME IN TO LET HIM KNOW WHAT'S ACCEPTED OR NOT, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING ON THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY AND THE BUILDING INSPECTORS.

THAT'S WHERE THE CONTRACTORS COME AND IN THEY TELL HIM WHAT TO DO TO PASS THE INSPECTION, SO THAT'S WHY WE REQUIRE CERTIFIED CONTRACTORS. IT'S UP TO THE BUILDING OFFICIALS IF THEY WANT TO APPROVE A CONSULT, BUT IT'S UP TO THE OWNER TO HIRE THE PCONTR THAT HE NEEDS TO KNOW WHAT TO DO

TO KEEP IT UP TO CODE. >> OKAY.

I SEE WE HAVE TO HAVE A PROCEDURE HERE, BUT I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME BACK AND FORTH WITH CITY AND THIS BUILDING OR THIS OWNER. WELL THAT AS FAIR SHAKE THAT NEEDS TO BE DETERMINE AND GET THAT PLAN OF OKAYS FROM HIM.

YOU CAN GIVE HIM I THINK OPTIONS OF IT'S TOO HAZARDOUS THE WAY IT SITS OR STANDS. AND THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

WE OUGHT TO TABLE THIS THING. >> MR. SCHROEDER THAT'S THE RESPONSIBILITY OF STAFF AND WE NEED THE DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD AND WE'VE ASKED FOR, WE'VE MADE A RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE IT IS AN UNSAFE SITUATION TO DEMOLISH NOW IF THE BOARD SEES FIT THAT'S WHAT WE'LL DO IF THE BOARD SEES 30, 60 WE'LL DO THAT AS WELL, AND WE'LL SIT DOWN AND GO THROUGH WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS A SAFE LIVABLE STRUCTURE.

BUT THAT'S WHAT WE DO. >> OR ONE TO REMOVE IT.

>> THAT'S OUR JOB. THAT'S WHAT WE DO.

OKAY. >> I THINK ANYTHING THAT WE DO NEEDS TO ADDRESS THE IMMEDIATE MATTER AND I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A TIME LIMENT AND HE NEEDS TO LOWER THAT THING WHETHER IT'S TWO WEEKS OR 30 DAYS, WHATEVER WE DO NEEDS TO INCLUDE THAT AND THAT NEEDS TO BE THE FIRST THING THAT HAPPENS IS TO GET THAT.

>> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH ANY OF THAT.

THE URGENCY OF THIS THING IS IF WE DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE TO FIND IT NUISANCE AND DEMOLISH IT, THE CHOICE IS THAT WE DO FIND IT NUISANCE, BUT THE REPAIR WOULD BE UNREASONABLE.

IT'S A NUISANCE SO I'D LIKE THE BOARD TO CONSIDER GIVING IT BACK TO STAFF AND GETTING IT SECURED FROM THE NEIGHBORS.

IT NEEDS A FENCE AROUND IT. NOW IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A

[01:55:01]

SOLID FENCE. IT CAN BE A CONSTRUCTION KIND OF FENCE, BUT IT NEEDS TO BE MAINTAINED AND WATCHED AND NO DIFFERENT THAN A CONSTRUCTION. IT NEEDS TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT.

SORRY. THE PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED RIGHT NOW, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M SUGGESTING WE GET.

IMMEDIATE PROTECTION OF THE PROPERTY FROM THE PUBLIC.

GIVE THIS BACK TO STAFF TO DETERMINE A 30-DAY PLAN OF ACTION AND SECURING IT AND MAKING IT SAFE.

>> SEE, I'M CONFLICTED. BECAUSE THEY'VE HAD 30 DAYS.

THE STAFF WENT TO THE PROPERTY AND WAS ORDERED OFF THE PROPERTY AND I THINK THAT THE FUTURE SHOULD BE DICTATEED BY PRECEDENCE THAT WERE SET IN THE PAST AND IT SHOWS THAT THERE IS NO INTENT. THERE'S TESTIMONY THERE'S NO RESOURCES AND HE DOESN'T HAVE THE TIME AND SO NINE MONTHS, THIS IS I THINK THAT THIS IS AN IMMEDIATE THREAT AND I THINK THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR WHAT WE HAVE IN THE TESTIMONY BEFORE US MAKES THE MOST SENSE.

HE'S GOT 30 DAYS. HE DIDN'T TALK TO THE STAFF, LOWER IT, APPEAL IT AND GET ON WITH LIFE, BUT THAT WOULD PROTECT THE CITY AND THE PEOPLE THE MOST.

>> THE CONCEPT OF GETTING A PROPERTY OWNER TO UNDERSTAND IS SOME OF THIS. I DON'T THINK HE UNDERSTANDS WHAT HE HAD TO DEAL WITH AND THE CLOCK TICKED.

THE CLOCK MOVED I SUPPOSE. >> IT'S BEEN GOING ON SINCE AP APRIL.

>> HOW ABOUT A MOTION? THAT HE'S GOT TO FENCE IT AND LOWER IT WITHIN 30 DAYS, AND IF THAT IS DONE THEN HE CAN DO THE 3 30/60.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT HE SECURES THE PROPERTY INSIDE OF 30 DAYS AND HAS A PLAN OF ACTION FOR LOWERING IT.

I DON'T THINK HE CAN, I MEAN SOMEBODY NEEDS A PLAN OF ACTION.

HOW DO YOU ACCOMPLISH THIS? IF HE SUCCEEDS OR DOESN'T SUC SUCCEED, UM...

>> SO ARE YOU ARTICULATING A MOTION RIGHT NOW?

>> I'M TRYING TO ARTICULATE SOMETHING.

A MOTION TO SECURE THE PROPERTY AND HAVE THE PLAN OF ACTION,

AND? >> I THINK ALL THE EFFORTS NEED TO BE CONCENTRATED ON REMOVING HAZARD.

FORGET THE PLAN OF ACTION RIGHT NOW TO ME.

GETTING THE HAZARD TAKEN CARE OF IS PRIORITY AND I DON'T THINK THAT THE STRUCTURE IS A HAZARD. I THINK THE HEIGHT OF IT IS, BUT

I DON'T THINK THE STRUCTURE IS. >> IT'S PERCHED UP ON THAT

FOUNDATION. >> SO TO ME THE IMMEDIATE DANGER IS TO GET THE THING DOWN AND FENCE IT IF YOU WANT TO FENCE IT. AND THEN WE CAN GO DO THE 30/60 OR WHATEVER. BUT I THINK HE'S GOT TO GET IT DOWN AND PRETTY QUICK. THAT'S MY OPINION.

>> LET'S MAKE THE MOTION TO GET THE HAZARD OF THE BUILDING UP IN THE AIR DOWN TO THE REQUIRED FLOODPLAIN FLOOR LINE HEIGHTH.

AND SECURE THE PROPERTY INSIDE OF 30 DAYS.

>> WITH A FENCE? >> WITH A FENCE.

AND THAT WOULD BE MY MOTION. >> OKAY.

[02:00:04]

MOTION BY MR. SCHROEDER THAT THE OWNER IS ORDERED TO LOWER THE BUILDING TO THE FLOODPLAIN HEIGHT AND SECURE THE PROPERTY

WITH A FENCE. >> AND MORE ACCURATELY THIS.

THE FLOOR LINE HAS CERTAIN HEIGHT ABOVE THE FLOODPLAIN THAT'S REQUIRED AND STAFF WOULD WORK THAT OUT PROPERLY.

>> ARE YOU PUTTING A TIME-LINE ON THIS?

>> INSIDE 30 DAYS. >> IS THERE A SECOND?

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION HERE? >> CAN I? I JUST WANT TO INTERJECT THAT BEFORE YOU CAN PUT YOUR MOTION, I THINK IT'S PROPER TO ORDER RE REPAIR OR A PLAN OF ACTION. THE STATUTE SAID YOU CAN ORDER CERTAIN THINGS. I DON'T THINK YOU HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO GIVE BUILDING CODE LEVEL SPECIFICITY AS FAR AS WHAT THEY SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT DO SO MY ADVICE WOULD BE TO BE MORE

GENERAL. >> THEY CAN LOWER IT TWO INCHES

AND IT WOULD STILL BE A HAZARD? >> RIGHT.

JUST KEEP IN MIND THE JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR MOTION IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

>> IF JURISDICTION OF BOARD IS TO GIVE IT BACK TO THE CITY STAFF FOR ELEVATION. IS THAT GOING UP TO CONTROL THE

HEIGHT. >> IF YOU TABLE IT, IT KIND OF KICKS THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD SO TO SPEAK.

THE CITY HAS ALREADY TRIED TO WORK WITH HIM, AND IF YOU GIVE HIM THE 30/60 RECOMMENDATION AND HE DOESN'T HAVE THE PLAN OF ACTION THEN IT WOULD BE BACK ANYWAY, AND IF YOU ORDER DEMOLITION HE WOULD HAVE TO DEMOLL NICHE 30 DAYS OR APPEAL.

YOU KNOW MY ADVICE IS STICK TO THE PRECEDENT THAT YOU'VE SET BEFORE A THIS POINT AS FAR AS KIND OF RECOMMENDATIONS YOU

MAKE. >> TO ME WE'RE NOT GIVING STAFF A DIRECTION. I'M TRYING TO GET THE HAZARD ADDRESSED. THE BILLEDING IS ON FIRE TO WE

HAVE TO ADDRESS OUT. >> YOU HAVE TO MAKE THE PLAN AND THEN THE ACTION. PRESENT A PLAN TO THE STAFF SO IT HAS TO BE APPROVED TO MAKE IT SA

SAFE. >> IS 30 DAYS OUR MINIMUM OF EVERYTHING WE DO. CAN I GET THE BUILDING SECURED IN 15 DAYS? THAT'S THE MOST URGENT THING.

I WANT IT SECURED. I DON'T CARE HOW IT'S SECURED.

I WANT IT SECURED TODAY. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO ASK THAT.

>> IN EFFECT, WE'RE GOING TO BE BACK IN MEETING IN A MONTH SO THERE'S NOT A GOOD ENERGY FORCE MEANT TOOL BETWEEN HERE AND 15 DAYS. I THINK WE RUN INTO PROBLEMS. YOU KNOW THE CITY IS ASKING FOR YOUR HELP BECAUSE THE CITY THINKS IT IS A HAZARD AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS BROUGHT TO YOU.

THEY'VE BEEN WORKING ON IT. >> TO ADDRESS YOUR CONCERN ABOUT TIMEFRAMES AND SECURING, AS WELL MR. SCHROEDER IN THE ORIGINAL NOTICE OF CONDEMNATION IT STATES THE OWNER HAS TEN DAYS TO MAINTAIN THE PROPERTY UP TO CODE AND THAT INCLUDES SECURING THE PROPERTY SO THAT WAS SENT TO HIM BACK ON DECEMBER THIRD OF 2021.

>> THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. >> OBVIOUSLY HASN'T HAPPENED.

>> JOSH? MR. MORRIS, SECURING THE PROPERTY IS NOT SPECIFICALLY THE STRUCTURE THEN, BUT POSSIBLY AROUND IT? WE NEED TO BE CLEAR BECAUSE THE HAZARD IS GETTING ON THAT PROPERTY.

>> WE ADDRESSED SECURING THE PROPERTY IT'S TO MAKE SURE THERE'S SOMETHING IN PLACE THAT WILL PREVENT ANY SAFETY HAZARDS AN GIVEN THE CONDITION OF THE STRUCTURE AND THE WAY IT'S SITTING, THE BEST WAY TO PREVENT SAFETY HAZARDS WOULD BE TO PUT

UP FENCE OR BOUNDARY. >> HOW FAR IS THE PROPERTY

BOUNDARY RIGHT NOW? >> I DON'T HAVE AN EXACT

MEASUREMENT. >> I MEAN, FROM THE PHOTOGRAPHS

[02:05:02]

THERE WAS ONE THAT LOOKED LIKE THERE WAS A STRUCTURE SITTING

RIGHT NEXT TO IT. >> THERE'S NOT MULTIPLE STRUCTURES ON THE LOT. THERE ARE TRAILERS AND OTHER

VEHICLES OF SORT. >> LIKE A BIG STEEL TONGUE OFF A TRIANGLE TONGUE IN ONE OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS.

>> THAT'S THE ONLY STRUCTURE ON THE LOT.

>> OKAY. I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THAT THING

WAS. >> SO BOUNDARIES TO THIS IS PART OF THE SECURING AND THE SAFETY. I'M ASKING IS IT TEN FEET FROM THE EDGES ON ONE SIDE AND THE REST OF IT HAS 30 FEET AROUND IT? I MEAN HOW CAN THIS THING SIT ON THE LOT WHEN IT WAS SIT DOWN. IT HAD TO HAVE SETBACKS

ORIGINALLY IN A THOUGHT. >> LET'S ROUND IT UP.

20 BY 50 AND IT HAS TO SIT ON A LOT THAT'S TEN FEET OFF ONE EDGE

SO IS THE LOT A 60 FOOT LOT? >> I MEAN TOO ME THAT STUFF IS

STAFF CAN DO. >> BUT WE'RE NOT GETTING THE INFORMATION FOR OUR BOARD TO UNDERSTAND.

SECURING THE PROPERTY WE WANT A FENCE AROUND IT AND WILL THAT BE

SECURE IS MY QUESTION? >> FOR THIS BOARD WE DON'T TYPICALLY LOOK AT SETBACKS. FOR STRUCTURAL HAZARDS.

>> NOBODY IS WORKING WITH ME HERE.

>> WE CAN PROBABLY GET THAT FOR YOU NEXT TIME.

>> I THINK THAT'S THE STAFF'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS. JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

>> THAT'S FINE, BUT I'M TRYING TO GET THE BOARD TO FEEL WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS VERY UNUSUAL MOTION.

I WANT IT SAFE AND I WANT IT INSIDE 30 DAYS.

AT THE VERY BEGINNING OF THIS THING I SAID MAYBE WE OUGHT TO TABLE IT AND LET THEM WORK SOME THINGS OUT.

>> SO THIS HELPS YOU OUT ANY ACCORDING TO THE APPRAISAL DISTRICT, THE SIZE OF THE LOT IS POINT 2410 ACRE AS EAT THE LE OF 10500 SQUARE FEET. AS FAR AS BUILDING WE DON'T HAVE INFORMATION ON THAT BECAUSE THERE WAS NEVER A RECORD OF A BUILDING PLACED ON THERE. WE DON'T TELL THE STAFF HOW TO

SECURE. >> I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO

SECURE THE BUILDING. >> PROPERTY?

>> PROPERTY. TO SECURE THE PROPERTY AND?

>> LOWER THE BUILDING. >> LOWER THE BUILDING TO GET IT

UM... TO REMOVE THE HAZARD. >> WITHIN?

>> WITHIN 30 DAYS. >> 30 DAYS.

>> I'LL SECOND. >> MOTION BY MR. SCHROEDER AND SECONDED BY MR. WEBB THE OWNER IS ORDERED TO SECURE THE PROPERTY AND LOWER THE STRUCTURE WITHIN 30 DAYS.

IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> THANK YOU.

>> SORRY, YES, BEFORE THE MOTION IS COUNTED OR VOTED ON, JUST TO

[02:10:02]

KIND OF REITERATE WITH THE 30/60 WE CAN INSTRUCT THE OWNER TO DO ANY ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS WITH THE PROPERTY.

THAT INCLUDES SECURING AND LOWERING WITHIN THAT TIMEFRAME WITH THE 30/60. WE CAN GIVE THEM SPECIFICS AND ALL THAT IS DOCUMENTED AND PRESENTED BEFORE YA'LL IF HE FAILS TO COMPLY AND THAT'S WHY I BELIEVE SHE WAS EXPLAINING THAT IT'S MORE GENERAL TO GO WITH THE 30/60 ORDER.

>> WE REALLY HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND ON THE FLOOR.

A VOTE IS IN ORDER? ROLL CALL, PLEASE?

>> DR. PARIS? >> NO.

>> MR. MASK BRAIR? >> NO.

>> MR. WEBB? >> NO.

>> MR. TURNER? >> NO.

>> MR. SCHROEDER? >> NO.

>> MR. BEARD? >> YES.

>> MOTION FAILED. >> OKAY.

MOTION FAILED. >> ALRIGHT.

WE'VE HAD A VERBAL CLARIFICATION FROM STAFF.

I MAKE A MOTION TO GIVE THE 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN, WELL QUESTION.

IF I'M GOING TO TRY THIS 30/60, AS YOU SAID AND IT'S ALL ENCOMPASSING ARE WE READY FOR PERMITS? ALL OF THE TRADES WHEN WE'RE JUST RECOGNIZING, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT'S INSIDE THIS THING. NOBODY HAS BEEN IN IT.

SO, IF I'M GOING TO GIVE 30 DAYS TO PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION, INCLUDING SECURING THE PROPERTY AND MAKING IT SAFE BY LOWERING IT I'M GOING TO GET THAT DONE IN 30 DAYS.

I'M GOING TO LOWER IT WITH SOMETHING MORE SECURE AND IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO BIND THAT ON THE OWNER THAT HE HAS TO GET HIS FOUNDATION DONE IN 30 DAYS. HE CAN'T DO IT.

PHYSICALLY WE CANNOT DO THE JOB RIGHT.

HE NEEDS TO SECURE WHATEVER HEIGHT IT IS RIGHT NOW AND MAKE IT SAFE SO HE CAN DO THE FOUNDATION APPROPRIATELY UNDER IT. I MEAN, GUYS, I KNOW THAT IS THAT MUCH IN ARCHITECTURE AND FOUNDATIONS.

>> I AGREE. >> WE CAN'T ASK THAT.

>> A MOTION? >> I'M GETTING THERE.

>> WE'RE ALL SUPPORTING YOU. WE WANT IT TO BE SAFE.

>> JUST TO RESPOND. AGAIN THE INITIAL 30 DAYS, THAT'S NOT GOING TO REQUIRE HIM TO HAVE THE FOUNDATION AND EVERYTHING REPAIRED WITHIN THOSE FIRST 30 DAYS.

THAT'S WHERE THE 60 DAYS COMES INTO PLAY.

ONCE HE SUBMITS THE PLAN OF ACTION, AND IF WE DO GIVE HIM ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTION TO SECURE THE PROPERTY, ONCE HE COMMITS TO THE PLAN OF ACTION IN THE FIRST 30 DAYS HE HAS THE 60 DAYS TO GET EVERYTHING ELSE PASSED. HIS ROUGH END INSPECTIONS AND IF THAT INCLUDES FOUNDATION REPAIR, AS WELL.

>> WELL I'LL REMIND MYSELF THAT THE THING HAS BEEN SITTING THERE A GOOD WHILE SO WHAT IS A COUPLE MORE MONTHS FOR HIM TO GET THAT THING LOWERED? IT'S EMINENT THAT WE GOT TO GET IT LOWERED. THAT'S THE FIRST THING WE HAVE TO DO. THE FIRST THING WE HAVE TO DO IS GET A FENCE AROUND IT. SO, MY MOTION WOULD BE TO SECURE THE PROPERTY AND 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND PROVIDE0.

[02:35:52]

>> FOR THE RECORD NO ACTION WAS TAKEN IN EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[02:35:54]

>> NO ACTION DURING THE PREVIOUS EXECUTIVE SESSION.

[02:35:58]

IS THERE MOTION ON THE FLOOR? IS THERE A MOTION FOR CASE

[02:36:08]

NUMBER 21 Ã004567. >> I WILL MAKE MOTION OF

[02:36:14]

FINDING THAT THE PROPERTY IS A PUBLIC NUISANCE IN THAT IT IS A HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC'S SAFETY AND WELFARE.

>> MOTION. SECOND.

>> I WILL SECOND. >> SECOND BY MR. TURNER THAT THE PROPERTY IS DECLARED A FEDERAL NUISANCE IT IS A HAZARD

TO THE SAFETY AND WELFARE. >> ROBO CALL PLEASE.

>> I. >> YES.

>> YES. >> MR. TURNER.

>> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> MOTION PASSED.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ANOTHER MOTION IN THE FORM OF AN ORDER TO SECURE THE PROPERTY WITHIN 30 DAYS.

>> IS THAT IT? >> AND IF THAT IS NOT DONE, THAT IS DONE. THAT IS DONE THEN ORDER A 3060 ORDER TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION INCLUDING THE TIME FRAME FOR REPAIR AND COST.

>> MOTION BY MR. SCHRADER. >> SECOND BY MR. TURNER.>> THE OWNER ORDERED TO SECURE THE PROPERTY WITHIN 30 DAYS.

IF THAT IS DONE 30 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL PERMITS AND PROVIDE A PLAN OF ACTION INCLUDING A TIME FRAME PREPARE AND COST ESTIMATES IF THAT IS DONE 60 DAYS TO OBTAIN ALL INSPECTIONS AND IF THAT IS DONE, ALL FINAL INSPECTIONS TO BE COMPLETED BY

THE EXPIRATION OF ALL PERMITS. >> YES.

>> YES. >> MR. TURNER.

>> YES. >> YES.

>> MOTION PASSED. >> GOOD LUCK THIS IS REALLY A UNIQUE CASE WE DO NOT NORMALLY SEE.

WE ARE TRYING TO HELP ALL WE CAN FOR YOU TO KEEP THE BUILDING. WISH YOU GOOD LUCK WITH IT.

I BELIEVE WITHOUT WE ARE COMPLETE WITH OUR AGENDA.

>> YES THAT WAS THE LAST CASE. >> THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE AND ALL YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TODAY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.