My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2001_1113_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2001
>
2001_1113_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/30/2011 2:14:22 PM
Creation date
9/30/2011 2:09:48 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
108
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1661 Stanbridge <br /> 1 0-3 1-0 1 Update <br /> 1 What is the time frame from abatement hearing to: <br /> • Completed correction. <br /> ° Will begin construction within one week <br /> ° Completion normally would take approximately 2 months but due to <br /> weather, some items may require completion in spring, including: <br /> Painting. <br /> - Draining pool. <br /> • Assessment of costs. <br /> ° Assessments of this type are assessed to taxes in this fall of each year at a <br /> council meeting. <br /> 2 What is the court process to get into the house if we need to and how much time will <br /> that add to the process? <br /> • If we take the roof off and find structural problems that necessitate entering <br /> the house it would require covering the structure with a tarp (such as roofers <br /> typically do for rain) and requesting entry from a Ramsey County court judge. <br /> Roseville's City Attorney has completed preliminary work in this regard and <br /> could go to court in a matter of days. However, there is no guarantee of entry. <br /> Running into this problem is considered remote as in the unlikely event of <br /> required truss repair, this could be completed from the roof without entering <br /> the structure. <br /> 3 Could we simply condemn the house? <br /> • No, the house does not fall under the definition of an unsafe structure, <br /> however, continued neglect of needed maintenance could render the home as <br /> `unsafe' in the future. <br /> 4 Why must we go through an abatement hearing a second time? Was the first hearing <br /> inadequate? Are there more house damages? <br /> • This is being brought back to Council because of the issue of residing vs. <br /> repainting. The cost of repainting is significant, however, because of the <br /> deteriorated condition of the siding, repainting will not last. Residing would <br /> be more cost effective for the owner. Looking for Council direction on this <br /> issue. <br /> • There are not `more' house damages other than the deterioration of the <br /> structure has continued. <br /> next page <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.