Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997 10-21 HCM MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION OCTOBER 21, 1997 CONFERENCE ROOM B BROOKLYN CENTER CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Robert Torres at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Chairperson Robert Torres, Vice Chairperson Ernie Erickson, Commissioners Lloyd Deuel, Henry Yang, Mark Yelich and Donald Arm. Also present were Council Liaison Kay Lasman and Community Development Specialist Tom Bublitz. Absent and excused from the meeting was Commissioner Jonathan Carter. Also absent was Commissioner Michael desParois. Commissioner Cannon had indicated prior to last month's meeting that he would be resigning from the commission. The Community Development Specialist noted he had asked Mr. Cannon to submit his resignation in writing, but to his knowledge that had not been done as yet. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There was a motion by Commissioner Deuel and seconded by Commissioner Erickson to approve the agenda, as submitted. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES SEPTEMBER 16, 1997 There was a motion by Commissioner Erickson and seconded by Commissioner Deuel to approve the September 16, 1997, Housing Commission minutes, as submitted. The motion passed. REPORT ON TIME OF SALE ORDINANCE The Community Development Specialist noted he and the City's Building Official, David Fisher, had met with representatives from the City of Bloomington and the City of Hopkins to obtain information that would be helpful in developing a proposed implementation plan for a Time of Sale ordinance. The purpose of the meeting with the City of Bloomington and Hopkins was to obtain specific information regarding the day today administration of a Time of Sale ordinance. He pointed out the City of Hopkins was included in their discussion because the City of Bloomington had originally borrowed their ordinance from the City of Hopkins. Also, as an additional note, he pointed out the City of Hopkins had initially used the City of Minneapolis Truth in Housing ordinance as a model for their ordinance. 10 -21 -97 -1- The Community Development Specialist explained further that, based on information obtained from the City of Bloomington and the City of Hopkins, he and the City's Building Official had prepared a proposed outline for implementation to review with the City Manager and Community Development Director, but as yet have not had an opportunity to review the proposed implementation with the City Manager and the Community Development Director. He explained the purpose of this evening's discussion was to review a sample Time of Sale implementation format modeled after the City of Bloomington and the City of Hopkins. He noted this model may not be the exact program the City of Brooklyn Center enacts, but it would serve as a basis for establishing an implementation model for discussions with the City Manager and Community Development Director. He pointed out he would plan to return to the Housing Commission in November with a proposed model for implementation of the Time of Sale ordinance. In review of the Bloomington and Hopkins model for administration of the Time of Sale ordinance, he noted that the homeowner /seller fast completes an application for inspection. This could be done in person or could be mailed. Included with the application would be a list of the most common hazardous items found in homes so the owner would have an opportunity to correct them in advance of the inspection. Additionally, in both Hopkins and Bloomington the owner pays a filing fee of between $15 -20 at the time the application is made. The second step in the process would require the homeowner. to make an appointment with a private inspector. The inspector would then perform the inspection, completing the Time of Sale evaluation report and giving a copy to the homeowner and to the City. If no hazardous items are found, the homeowner is issued a certificate of approval by the City. This certificate of approval could also be in the form of a letter, as used in the City of Hopkins. This document could be taken to the closing to demonstrate compliance with the ordinance. He pointed out that, according to the City of Bloomington, title companies are not required to comply with the Time of Sale ordinance in order to close on a house, but the majority of closers do ask for some type of certificate of approval or letter from the City with regard to compliance with the Time of Sale ordinance. Following the model of the Bloomington and Hopkins ordinance, if there are hazardous items to be corrected, the owner must correct them before closing. The owner must also make the evaluation report available to potential buyers. An owner can also defer correction of hazardous items to the buyer by agreement between the buyer and seller. The City of Bloomington has indicated that only five percent of the transactions in the City defer the correction of items to the buyer. If any of the hazardous items require a permit, the owner would obtain a permit and correct them or have the work done by a contractor. In keeping with the Bloomington and Hopkins ordinances, the owner must also correct any non permit items designated as hazardous. The City of Hopkins has indicated that approximately 20% of the hazardous items required to be corrected under their ordinance require a permit. 10 -21 -97 -2- In both the Bloomington and Hopkins programs, a reinspection is done on permit and non permit items. In both cities, city staff does the reinspections. If items comply on reinspection, the owner is sent a certificate of approval in the City of Bloomington, and in the City of Hopkins the owner is notified by a letter. The Community Development Specialist pointed out one option for the City of Brooklyn Center would be to require the private inspectors to do the reinspection if City staff does not perform this function. Chairperson Torres stated he believes there should be a level of consistency in the City of Brooklyn Center's implementation of the program with regard to other cities with a similar program. He pointed out consistency between the programs would aid in a more easily understandable program for the private inspectors and the homeowners. He also pointed out he believes we should add some type of thank you to the homeowner, along with either the certificate of approval or letter of compliance. Commissioner Yelich recounted the slides of the properties acquired by the City in the 53rd Avenue Development and Linkage Project. He noted many of these slides were quite disturbing and inquired as to how the ordinance would apply to homes that are in a state of disrepair such as many of the homes were on 53rd Avenue. The Community Development Specialist discussed the 53rd Avenue project and noted that in a number of homes on 53rd, the value of the property did not warrant major capital investment in the home even though this was needed to rehabilitate the home. As a result, a number of homes were repaired by owners, which in several instances resulted in code violations on items such as electrical, plumbing, and in some cases, structural components. Commissioner Yelich inquired as to what point might a homeowner actually walk away from the house and give up on repairing it. The Community Development Specialist noted that occurrences of people actually walking away or abandoning a house are still uncommon, and noted even the houses the City buys that are defined as "blighted" still have some economic value. The commission discussed instances where homes that may be beyond rehabilitation from an economic sense and how a Time of Sale ordinance might address them. The Community Development Specialist noted the Time of Sale ordinance is not really designed to address this type of house since we are assuming in most cases that the home is ready for sale on the real estate market. He pointed out the Time of Sale ordinance will not require correction of any items other than those items which are considered hazardous and compliance with the Time of Sale ordinance will not guarantee a house is without problems or even one that is going to be competitive on the open market. Commissioner Torres inquired as to how known code violations under the Time of Sale ordinance would be addressed if the home does not sell and goes off the market. He inquired 10 -21 -97 -3- if there is any liability on the City's part to follow through with seeing that these items are corrected. He inquired as to how this situation will be handled under the ordinance, and whether or not the owners would be ordered to correct the hazardous items even if the property is not sold. The Community Development Specialist replied he would assume these items would have to be handled under a different City ordinance if the home did not close, since the Time of Sale ordinance requires items be corrected prior to the sale of the property. He pointed out this problem may become more acute if life safety types of repairs are involved. He noted he had asked Dave Fisher, the City's Building Official, to attend next month's meeting and this would be a good item to discuss in more detail with Mr. Fisher. The commission concluded its review of the Time of Sale ordinance with a discussion on the most common types of hazardous items found in homes, including the list prepared for the City of Bloomington program. They noted this would be an important element in any implementation of a Time of Sale ordinance. REPORT ON 1997 CODE ENFORCEMENT AC77VI77ES The Community Development Specialist reported that for 1997 the Community Development Department hired a full-time temporary employee to inspect all single family homes in the city. He pointed out the inspection has been completed and virtually every single family property in the city has been inspected, resulting in a total of 1,557 compliance orders under the various City ordinances relative to property maintenance. With 1,557 orders for compliance, this means approximately 22 of the approximately 7,200 single family homes in the city were cited for some type of code violation. Of the 1,557 properties with violations, 1,235, or 79 had complied with the orders for correction. He pointed out approximately 75 citations have been issued under this program. A citation is issued when a reinspection is made and there is still no compliance and the inspector feels it is appropriate to issue a formal citation, which results in a fine to be paid by the owner /occupant. He briefly reviewed the process employed by the inspector with regard to administering the program, pointing out an inspection is done on the property initially and a letter is generated to the property. Personal contact is also attempted at this point. He noted the City's computer system is set up to allow certain time periods for various corrections to take place. For example, painting of a house or garage may allow a 60 -day time period where the removal of junk from a property may only indicate 14 days for compliance. If there is no compliance upon reinspection of the property on the compliance date, a copy of the original letter is sent and a door hanger is also placed on the property `informing the occupant of code violations which have not been corrected. Again, personal contact is also attempted at this point. If there is still no compliance on the property and no extensions have been granted, a formal citation can be issued under the ordinance. A citation is essentially a ticket that is paid at the 10 -21 -97 -4- x Hennepin County Courthouse. If there is still no compliance after the citation process, a formal complaint can be issued and the violation then becomes a misdemeanor violation. The Community Development Specialist pointed out the most common violations under this year's inspection program are painting of houses, garages, sheds, etc., brush and debris removal, junk vehicle removal, and junk removal around the property. The commission discussed the City's code compliance enforcement program and there was a general consensus among commission members that the program was accomplishing what it had set out to do and they were supportive of continuing the code enforcement program for next year. Several commission members noted they had personal experiences with the code enforcement program and noted they believed it had made an improvement in the properties they were aware of in their neighborhoods. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT ON CITY BOND REFERENDUM Council Member Lasman noted that at the planning stages of the police and fire department referendum seven sites were looked at, including the Humboldt Avenue site and the site adjacent to City Hall in the parking lot area of City Hall. She explained the start -up costs for both sites would have been approximately the same, but maintenance costs were higher for the Humboldt Avenue site. She pointed out the Council felt the presence of the police department in the northeast neighborhood would help move the neighborhood in the right direction and the costs of police calls may be slightly lower, which may offset the increase in maintenance for this particular site. Council Member Lasman noted many people in the northeast quadrant of the city expressed a desire in seeing the police department located there. Commission members discussed the fire and police bond referendum, and Chairperson Torres inquired as to the response time of the Humboldt site. Council Member Lasman replied the response time is not as ideal as a site that would be located at 63rd and Brooklyn Boulevard, which is more centrally located, but this site would have higher acquisition costs. She also noted the City Hall site is also not centrally located and would not have ideal response times. Council Member Lasman invited commission members to attend the open houses at the police department and fire department locations, and invited any further questions from the commission. OTHER BUSINESS Commissioner Deuel noted in the Minneapolis Star Tribune newspaper over the past several days there were a series of articles which addressed new home construction problems, particularly problems related to moisture and mold in homes constructed within the last 10 -15 years. He believes this should not be a "buyer beware" situation in terms of buying a new house, and he believes the v o ernment should et involved in some of regulation which would help g g type P rotect P homeowners in these instances. He suggested builders should be held accountable, and the State 10 -21 -97 -5- should address this problem. Commissioner Erickson noted he believes the problem may be addressed at the State level, and many new building products may not have been adequately researched and tested over the past number of years. With regard to the moisture problem in homes, Commissioner Erickson suggested the solution may be an air -to -air heat exchanger, which should have been installed in the new homes and can be installed in existing homes. The commission continued to discuss the problems highlighted in the Star Tribune articles and how these items might be prevented by possible code enforcement. Commissioner Yelich suggested perhaps the City of Brooklyn Center could set a standard for new house construction and address some of these issues in future new home construction in the city, particularly in the 53rd Avenue Development and Linkage Project. Commissioner Erickson noted the level of new home activity in the city is extremely limited, and the opportunity to address this issue is therefore limited in the City of Brooklyn Center. The Community Development Specialist brought up the issue of absences from commission meetings, and noted Commissioner desParois has only attended one meeting according to the record. According to the bylaws, this constitutes automatic resignation. He noted the process for actually resigning under the resignation provision is not entirely clear under the ordinance, and suggested the commission might want to pass a resolution essentially declaring Commissioner desParois's position vacant and forwarding this to the Mayor. The commission discussed the matter of passing a motion and how to address the absentee issue. There was a general consensus among commission members to instruct the Community Development Specialist to write a letter for the Chair's signature to Mr. desParois, informing him of the bylaws of the commission and the subsequent resignation of his seat on the commission. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Erickson and seconded by Commissioner Deuel to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 9:50 P.M. Chairperson 10 -21 -97 76-