Saint Paul logo
File #: RLH RR 17-23    Version:
Type: Resolution LH Substantial Abatement Order Status: Passed
In control: City Council
Final action: 6/21/2017
Title: Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for 129 JESSAMINE AVENUE EAST in Council File RLH RR 16-28.
Sponsors: Amy Brendmoen
Ward: Substantial Abatement Orders, Ward - 5
Attachments: 1. 129 Jessamine Ave E.R-R Findings Revised Ltr.5-19-17.pdf, 2. 129 Jessamine Ave E.email from Zuly Gonzalez.5-22-17.pdf, 3. 129 Jessamine Ave E.R-R Findings Ltr.6-21-17.pdf
Related files: RLH RR 16-28, RLH RR 17-24
Title
Making finding on the appealed substantial abatement ordered for 129 JESSAMINE AVENUE EAST in Council File RLH RR 16-28.

Legislative Hearing Staff Comments
Please note: there is a Legislative Hearing scheduled for June 20, 2017 to determine whether conditions have been met which would result in the recommendation that additional time be granted by the Council to complete the rehabilitation of the property. If the conditions listed in this resolution have not been met, the Legislative Hearing Officer will ask for an amendment to the resolution reflecting current circumstances.

Body
AMENDED 6/21/17
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted RLH RR 16-28 on September 7, 2016 which granted 180 days to repair the structure, correct all of the deficiencies listed in the Order to Abate Nuisance Building and the Code Compliance Report at 129 Jessamine Avenue East; and

WHEREAS, the Legislative Hearing Officer reviewed this case on June 13, 2017 to determine if the owner and/or responsible party abated the nuisance conditions and found these conditions were abated and received reports and testimony from Department of Safety and Inspections (DSI) staff; legal and project management representatives of the owner and a neighbor of the property; and

WHEREAS, DSI staff reported the rehabilitation of the house is approximately 65% complete and all the necessary permits have been pulled, but for the plumbing permit; and

WHEREAS, it was unclear in the course of the hearing whether the existing contractors had been paid or would be completing the work, or if separate contractors would need to be hired to complete the project; and

WHEREAS, it was the financing from Nelson Capital which was reportedly to be used for the rehabilitation was not used and correspondence indicates they are no longer involved with the project; and

WHEREAS, the project manager who was reportedly to be in charge of the rehabilitation backed out of the project; and

WHEREAS, exterior nuisance cond...

Click here for full text
Date NameDistrictOpinionCommentAction
No records to display.