My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03200
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3200
>
pf_03200
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/26/2007 3:25:45 PM
Creation date
12/9/2004 6:52:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3200
Planning Files - Type
Planning-Other
Address
1661 STANBRIDGE AVE
Planning Files - Resolution #
9953
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
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
<br />1661 Stanbridge <br />10-31-01 Update <br /> <br />1. What is the time frame from abatement hearing to: <br />. Completed correction. <br />o Will begin construction within one week <br />o 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 />o Assessments of this type are assessed to taxes in this fall of each year at a <br />council meeting. <br /> <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 /> <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 /> <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 /> <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 ofthe <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 /> <br />next page <br /> <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.