11-26-1997 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117 -1600 (612) 484 -2177 / FAX: (612) 484 -4538 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Fahey & Members of the City Council FROM: Joel Hanson, City Administrator DATE: November 21, 1997 RE: Assessment Hearing Relative to Klein Property at 2620 Rice Street MAYOR Michael I. Fahey COUNCIL Beverly Scalze Jim LaValle Steve Morelan Bob Pedersen ADMINISTRATOR Joel R. Hanson Attached is the hearing notice and the resolution to assess the cost of demolition for the hazardous structure at the Klein property. It is likely that the Kleins will be represented by an attorney at this meeting who may raise the following objections: ♦ Too much time has lapsed between the actual demolition in 1992 and the assessment hearing in 1997. Response: The City Attorney has informed me that there is no limitation on time for assessing costs associated with this type of improvement. ♦ At the last meeting Mrs. Klein was at, she made reference to the fact that the demolition of the structure was not done in compliance with the specifications. Response: From my perspective, the specifications were followed. (See copy attached.) You will note provision #5 required the structure to be completely demolished to the foundation and that the foundation was not to be damaged. Provision #11 required clean fill be placed in excavated areas to match surrounding grade and seeding in disturbed areas be done within the allotted timeframe. Given the fact that the basement area was not an excavation associated with the project and that we had the requirement that the foundation not be damaged, logic would indicate that this area was not to be filled. That is why a fence was installed. This point can be further confirmed in review of the pleadings on this matter by the Klein's attorney. In an answer and counter claim dated November 20, 1992 (copy attached), you will note that the defendant was asking the Court to order the plaintiff (City) to secure the subject property upon completion of the razing and that they asked the Court to order the defendants be allowed to reconstruct a residential dwelling on the subject property, notwithstanding any regulations, zoning, or otherwise, to the contrary. Given the Judge's order dated September 15, 1992 (copy attached), it appears this issue was unresolved and that the house was only allowed to be razed to the foundation. If a house was to be ordered reconstructed by the Judge, filling the basement would have been a problem. Page 1