CCP 11-30-1987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting, November 9, 1987 - .. Page 4 ORD #25l (Cont'd) Council discussed the St. Paul Nuisance Ordinance, . ,'V,,' provided by the Attorney. and concurred that the ordinance ~ould not be applicable in Arden Hills, nor does it address exterior of existing buildings which have not been completed. Hansen suggested directing the Attorney to draft or add language to the proposed ordinance which relates to abatement of existing construction that has not been completed. Winiecki suggested referral to Planning Commission for their input and suggestions that could form the basis for language which would address the concerns relative to existing homes or buildings which have remained uncompleted over a number of years. Sather pointed out that, in his opinion, the Attorney's intent was for a comparison to be drawn by Council between St. Paul's Nuisance Ord. and ours, to determine areas for inclusion that would provide Arden Hills ordinance with more enforcibility. He also stated that the concerns of the Building Inspector, relative to exterior completion of sidewalks and driveways, could be deleted from Ordinance #251 and the matter could be addressed in our nuisance ordinance. Mayor Woodburn explained that the main concern and real issue is how to get existing bUildings. that have stood uncompleted for 5 years or more, completed; suggested the Attorney address that concern and clarify a method for enforcement as it relates to existing buildings. The Clerk Administrator stated in her opinion. after conversations with the . Attorney, there are two separate issues being discussed: l. Adoption of Ordinance No. 251 [with revisions for allowing additional time for completion under Section 1 (c)] to address construction after adoption of the Ordinance; and, 2. The purpose of sending St. Paul's new Nuisance Ordinance was to compare it with ours to see if there was anything Council deemed appropriate for inclusion in our current nuisance ordinance, so that it could relate to houses already constructed but not completed. Morrison explained that Ord. #251 deals with new construction; Council could strengthen our current nuisance ordinance to deal with the existing housing that remains not completed. Hansen stated it was her opinion that the St. Paul Ordinance has no provisions which are applicable to Arden Hills problem. Morrison questioned if the Nuisance Abatement Section may be applicable; explained that if Council desires to adopt Ordinance #251, Lynden could then draft an amendment to the current nuisance ordinance which addresses Council concerns relative to completion of existing housing. Council reviewed Chapter 45, Subd. 1 of St. Paul's Ordinance and were unable to determine if this section would be aplicable to Arden Hills. . Council discussed placement of language in Ordinance #251 to provide for a time-frame for completion of existing non-completed construction before it is declared a nuisance and penalized under our current nuisance ordinance. Mayor Woodburn suggested the Attorney insert appropriate language in Ordinance 11251. such as; !I0ld housing must have exterior completed within two years or will be declared a nuisance and subject to penalty as outlined in the Arden Hills Nuisance Ordinance.tl Morrison explained that insertion may require an amendment to the nuisance ordinance also; or amend Ordi~ance #251 to include the nuisance ordinance amendmen t . Council concurred to request Attorney Lynden revise Ordinance #251 to include language which pertains to existing homes, which have uncompleted exteriors; . setting a time-frame for completion before they are deemed a nuisance and subject to penalty under Arden hills current Nuisance Ordinance, and, furthermore, that Lynden advise if this would adequately address Council concerns as discussed at this meeting. Council further concurred to discuss this matter at their Regular Council meeting to be held November 30, 1987. and requested the Attorney's response at that meeting.