04/28/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

municipal .court action hhad been filed a:t:ter which a 10-day grace period was allowed to comply at defendant's request. That ha~ not happened an~ this abatement action was in- stituted. Assistant Manager said that Stan Long, assistant city attorney, and Mick Nolte, superintendent of building inspection, had met several times with people financing the~ project and h~d agreed that this action would gain compliance in the most expeditious manner. Councilman Bradley returned to the meeting. Mr. Nolt~ reviewed progress of the development to date, legal actions delaying the con- st~uction, stop work o~ders issued. He said i~ no instance were final inspections asked for or certificates of occupancy granted prior to actual occupancy of the buildings. Meeting had been held with the attorney representing the people now having control of the project and who will take responsibility for its completion. Some of the immediate safety problems have ~een taken care of, he sai4, in addition to agreement to submit a compre- hensive schedule for correction of deficiencies in theproject. All safety features are to be corrected in five days, those of a less critical nature will have:up to 60 days to correct. Stan Long noted the list of deficiencies to be attached to abatement notices and explained code regulations governing abatement actions of this type. Adoption of the resolution, he said, sets a time period in which to accomplish correction of those deficiencies, or would allow the city itself to make the corrections or seek other legal actions to gain compliance. He said this seemed a reasonabl~ solution to a very difficult situation and represents the best chance of safety to those people affected by the project. In response_to Council- man Keller, Mr. Long said the list of deficiencies was in the Council's hands, attached to the copi.es of the resolution and notice of abatement distributed to them. Mr. Keller moved second by Mrs. Beal to adopt the resolution, including the list of deficiencies and time tables as set out therein. -- Councilwoman Beal asked if people would be living in the project in the meantime. Assistant Manager said they would. However, all have been given notice of the abatement. Councilman Hamel was in favor of the action recommended. However, he was concerned about city regulations that permitted a situation such as this to develop over a three-year period. He wondered if the inspection system or inspectors were at fault where an acci- dent has to happen before something is done (referring to recent fire. and death in the project). Assistant Manager explained that the project had been stopped by inspectors and reluctantly started again when the developer said the work would be brought into com- pliance. The project had proceeded in this fashion until finally court action was taken, further failure to comply and finally this abatement action. This was extraordinary en- forcement action, he said, and he hoped it would bespeak the extraordinary lack of response to the inspectors requirements. Vote was taken on the motion to adopt the resolution. Motion.:carried unanimously. Upon motion duly made, seconded, and carried, the meeting was adjourned at 12:05 a.m. on~Tuesday, April 29, 1975. 4/~ -tt A. K. Martin Asst. City Manager 4/28/75 - 40 2..45-