Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />AUGUST 26, 2015 <br />Torkelson recapped that Berres was opposed to paying Housing Resource <br />Group to overseeing the project as well as opposed to escrowing the funds <br />for the rehab. Torkelson reported that he has reviewed the workscope <br />prepared by Housing Resource Group and had some concerns with some <br />of the recommendations, particularly the work proposed for the unit that <br />Berres resides in. Berres felt that some of the items proposed for the unit <br />Berres resides in are cosmetic in nature, such as replacement of carpet and <br />linoleum. Torkelson felt that the workscope should be revised deleting the <br />items for the unit Berres resides in. Keis noted that the assumption is that <br />Berres will continue to reside in his unit, but pointed out that he would <br />have the ability to rent out both sides of the duplex at any time. Berres <br />pointed out that he cannot lease to a tenant until the City approves the <br />rehab and until he obtains a rental license. <br />McGraw asked if the City inspects rental units when rental licenses are <br />applied for. The City Administrator indicated that the property owner <br />hires an inspector from the City's list of approved inspectors. Inspections <br />are then done to ensure compliance with rental guidelines which primarily <br />address hazardous conditions. <br />Berres noted comments that he has not followed through with rental <br />licensing for his duplex. Berres indicated that he had no tenants in the <br />duplex when the City developed its rental licensing ordinance. The City <br />Administrator noted that the ordinance was adopted in 2009 and that <br />Berres had tenants that were evicted in 2012. Berres stated that he was <br />never informed of the ordinance until 2012. <br />The City Administrator indicated that the damage occurred to Berres' <br />duplex in 2005 and that the City has never stopped the rehab of the <br />duplex. Berres reported that he called the City to find out what he needed <br />to do to bring the duplex up to Code. Berres indicated that he was <br />informed through a letter from the City Administrator that he could not <br />have a duplex any longer because of a lapse of use. Berres stated that he <br />disagreed that a lapse of use occurred given that he has always lived in one <br />of the duplex units. Fischer noted that when Berres came before the <br />Council recently he acknowledged the lapse of use. Berres stated that he <br />was told that the use had lapsed, but it was never proven. Fischer noted <br />that the process that is underway is consideration of Berres' appeal to the <br />lapse of use determined by the City. Fischer stated that the first decision <br />for the Board is to determine whether or not the property should continue <br />as a duplex. Berres again disputed that the lapse of use occurred given <br />that the structure should be considered versus one duplex unit. Berres <br />again referred to a conversation he had with City Attorney Chad <br />Lemmons. Keis noted the legal opinion that the City has from the City <br />Attorney's office that the duplex use has lapsed. City Attorney Martin <br />8 <br />