Committee talks handling building complaints

CELINA - City officials inspect buildings for potential structural issues based on complaints, city safety service director Tom Hitchcock said.

In the wake of a few high-profile cases cropping up on social media and beyond, city council members in recent weeks gathered for a committee betterment meeting to review the process used to determine whether a building is structurally safe.

"We're completely complaint driven on these," Hitchcock said.

Since 2012, city officials have sent out 36 unsafe building notifications. As a result, 27 buildings have been demolished, including eight razed by the city, Hitchcock said.

He shared with councilors a list of six unsafe building notifications issued so far this year.

"If it's something minor like a window's missing or something, we usually just call the property owner or leave a door hanger," Hitchcock said. "Most of the time they fix it."

Councilors' attention soon turned to a prominent building at 202 S. Main St., owned by Amber, Holly and Brenda Lefeld, according to city documents.

"What actually, I guess, started the letter from us was that window in that third floor fell out onto the street … which if somebody was under it - major problems," Hitchcock explained.

He said that prompted the owners to contact an engineer to look at how to remedy the building's issues.

"They know the corner's peeling away from the building," he continued. "We're working with them right now, and they've been excellent to work with."

The owners were initially given a May 1 deadline to make necessary repairs. The period has since been extended to Sept. 1.

"Pretty much any property owner that works with us, we work with them," Hitchcock said. "If they need a little extra time, we give them a little extra time. Our goal is not to tear down buildings. It's for the property owners to fix them up."

The letter sent to the Lefelds cited four violations under the city's unsafe building policy, among them interior or exterior walls or other vertical structural members that list, lean or buckle.

The owners were ordered to make necessary repairs to render the building safe or to raze and remove the building. Failure to do so would result in the city's assuming repairs or demolition.

Such a letter lets owners know what steps they must take to make the building safe again, councilman Jeff Larmore said. They may sound harsh, but they're businesslike about what is going to happen if repairs aren't made, he said.

Hitchcock said the letters serve as motivation.

"They know they have a problem with a building," he said about most property owners who receive an unsafe building letter. "It's just who wants to put money into a building that's falling apart?"

Councilman Mike Sovinski, however, is at odds with that approach. He finds it problematic that the city's first contact with a property owner came in the form of what may be taken as a threatening letter - and bad public relations for the city.

He suggested city administrators first send out a letter informing owners that their property has issues, followed by a second, more specific letter laying out the code violations.

Hitchcock replied that the city could be held liable if it knowingly sends out an unsafe building letter and someone were injured before the delivery of the second letter.

"That should not be our first correspondence with the property (owner)," Sovinski said in reference to Hitchcock's letter to the Lefelds. "We've got other issues in town that we've put off for years that opens us up to more liability in terms of risk situations."

Sovinski also noted that some may wonder why one property owner is sent an unsafe building letter while another property owner with apparent building issues isn't.

Hitchcock said the policy targets unsafe structures.

"We should be enlarging our list of properties that have issues, and we should be sending letters out, not the initial letter that you sent out … (but) more of a courtesy notice letter saying, 'Your building has problems, come and talk to us about what needs to be done,' " Sovinski said.

Larmore reminded Sovinski that councilors in 2012 approved legislation to strengthen city administrators' ability to go after unsafe buildings.

The policy authorizes Hitchcock to act as building inspector and deem structures dangerous and unfit and require repair or demolition. It explicitly lists several defects that would define a dangerous and unfit structure, such as leaning or buckling walls; damage by decay, deterioration, fire, wind or other elements; and unfit conditions for habitation.

Councilman June Scott said Sovinski's suggestion of first issuing a courtesy letter is fine but noted "these people know when it's going to be coming."

Councilman Eric Clausen asked how many times a property owner is allowed to address an issue by merely applying "makeup."

It comes down to structural safety, not aesthetic concerns, mayor Jeff Hazel said.

"It's about securing the facility, making it safe, and it isn't necessarily going to make it pretty," Hazel said. "It's like putting plywood or particle board over an open window. It looks ugly but it's now secure."