Code Enforcement/Property Maint. in building Dept?

[Coder]

Priority???

Apartments if you have them

Businesses


Houses last or by complaint

The priority is an attempt to create more "affordable" housing by forcing property owners to renovate or remove old mobile homes and stick built houses.

 

[cda]

The priority is an attempt to create more "affordable" housing by forcing property owners to renovate or remove old mobile homes and stick built houses.

Yep seen something like that before, does not look pretty

Hope the city has a solid demo ordinance and a lot of money.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Check your state environmental laws with regards to demolishing buildings. Some allow a property owner to remove an SFR without doing asbestos and lead paint abatement However if the government is demolishing the SFR then asbestos and lead paint removal must be done prior to demolishing the SFR which can add significant cost to the process. How are you going to dispose of the mobile homes? Most land fills will not take them.

 

[SCBO1]

I'd check with your City Attorney and see if he can draft a process for you, might keep you and your boss out of hot water.

 

[cda]

Check your state environmental laws with regards to demolishing buildings. Some allow a property owner to remove an SFR without doing asbestos and lead paint abatement However if the government is demolishing the SFR then asbestos and lead paint removal must be done prior to demolishing the SFR which can add significant cost to the process. How are you going to dispose of the mobile homes? Most land fills will not take them.

FEMA might buy them

 

[Coder]

Yep seen something like that before, does not look pretty

Hope the city has a solid demo ordinance and a lot of money.

My thoughts exactly. That and a City Council and Building Official that is willing to cut their own throat with the public cheering them on.

 

[JCraver]

I'd check with your City Attorney and see if he can draft a process for you, might keep you and your boss out of hot water.

Yes, please talk to your City Atty before you implement anything - this will save you endless aggravation if he/she knows what they're doing and is familiar with the laws and ordinances you're working under. Also, it gives you another layer of "we did this before we initiated this", to keep yourself off of the hot seat.

 

[JCraver]

Check your state environmental laws with regards to demolishing buildings. Some allow a property owner to remove an SFR without doing asbestos and lead paint abatement However if the government is demolishing the SFR then asbestos and lead paint removal must be done prior to demolishing the SFR which can add significant cost to the process. How are you going to dispose of the mobile homes? Most land fills will not take them.

Illinois (outside of Chicago/Cook County) is surprisingly cool about this. If you're tearing down multi-families over 4 units or a cluster of houses in the same neighborhood then you have to jump through the hoops, otherwise just tear 'em down and haul 'em off.

 

[Coder]

Illinois (outside of Chicago/Cook County) is surprisingly cool about this. If you're tearing down multi-families over 4 units or a cluster of houses in the same neighborhood then you have to jump through the hoops, otherwise just tear 'em down and haul 'em off.

Asbestos and lead are harmless there.

 

[fatboy]

Asbestos and lead are harmless there.

Must be the altitude!

 

[JCraver]

It works for me, less nonsense I have to keep track of.

But really - pay the EPA their fee, pay the muni fee, set up containment, dismantle/take down/scrape all that stuff off, double bag it, get inspected, tear down the house, and then take it all to the landfill. OR.. Pay the muni fee, get a hydrant meter and a water hose, wet the house down while you're bashing it to pieces, and then haul it all to the same landfill.

One way is easy, and creates no measurable harm to the community. The other way is not easy, also does not create any measurable harm to the community, and helps employ half a dozen government inspectors and administrators to check on it, oversee it, and collect dollar bills. Which way makes more sense to you?

 

[Coder]

It works for me, less nonsense I have to keep track of.

But really - pay the EPA their fee, pay the muni fee, set up containment, dismantle/take down/scrape all that stuff off, double bag it, get inspected, tear down the house, and then take it all to the landfill. OR.. Pay the muni fee, get a hydrant meter and a water hose, wet the house down while you're bashing it to pieces, and then haul it all to the same landfill.

One way is easy, and creates no measurable harm to the community. The other way is not easy, also does not create any measurable harm to the community, and helps employ half a dozen government inspectors and administrators to check on it, oversee it, and collect dollar bills. Which way makes more sense to you?

Thanks for the clarification and now that you have explained it, it does make sense to me. Unfortunately, our municipalities and County landfill still rely on documentation from the State for demolition permits verifying that the asbestos has been tested for and if found to exceed the trigger levels, abatement procedures are required and monitored. I wish I could just allow the demo contractor to wet it down and go. Maybe there is a way to get a local demolition ordinance passed that supersedes the State? We are a home rule municipality. Just hunting for insight and answers so I appreciate your response and apologize for my uninformed comment.

 

[tmurray]

We have a process from the province we follow. The way we approach it is to assess the risk to life safety and environmental contamination. Properties are coded as green for low hazard, yellow for medium, and red for high. When it comes to enforcement, worst is first. The process is to notify the resident of the issue and attempt some voluntary compliance. If voluntary compliance fails, we issue a notice to comply with a deadline of between 2 weeks to 2 months to complete the work. The property owner can appeal this notice to a committee of council who can confirm, modify or rescind the notice. Typically, the only thing done is to extend the time frame. If the property owner does not agree with the appeal at this level, they can appeal to the provincial appeals court, but only for a procedural review (it is not a court hearing). The appeals judge will confirm, modify, or rescind the notice. After all this, if the notice is not complied with, we contract the work out to a local contractor through a public bid process and the property owner is responsible to reimburse the municipality. If the property owner refuses to reimburse the municipality, we can notify the province who will reimburse us and apply the outstanding balance to the property tax bill next year once we provide all documentation that we have followed the proper process.

 

[JCraver]

Thanks for the clarification and now that you have explained it, it does make sense to me. Unfortunately, our municipalities and County landfill still rely on documentation from the State for demolition permits verifying that the asbestos has been tested for and if found to exceed the trigger levels, abatement procedures are required and monitored. I wish I could just allow the demo contractor to wet it down and go. Maybe there is a way to get a local demolition ordinance passed that supersedes the State? We are a home rule municipality. Just hunting for insight and answers so I appreciate your response and apologize for my uninformed comment.

No need to apologize to me. I was just throwing out how we do it, and why I think it's better than adding more gov't. to the process.

I don't know what the rules are in CO but I'm going to guess you probably can't get a municipal ordinance that will supersede your State, homerule or not - most States don't like to give up any "powers" (whether they should have them in the first place or not).

 

[JCraver]

NESHAP, from the Fed EPA, is how this is governed and where all the State rules come from. https://www.epa.gov/compliance/nati...azardous-air-pollutants-compliance-monitoring

My State has decided to follow (but not build upon) that guidance, and is the reason we operate as we do. The Fed rules say 4 units or more or commercial buildings. Therefore: no residential requirements from the Feds, and (so far!) nothing from the State of Illinois - unless you live in Cook County and/or Chicago.

 

[JCraver]

We have a process from the province we follow. The way we approach it is to assess the risk to life safety and environmental contamination. Properties are coded as green for low hazard, yellow for medium, and red for high. When it comes to enforcement, worst is first. The process is to notify the resident of the issue and attempt some voluntary compliance. If voluntary compliance fails, we issue a notice to comply with a deadline of between 2 weeks to 2 months to complete the work. The property owner can appeal this notice to a committee of council who can confirm, modify or rescind the notice. Typically, the only thing done is to extend the time frame. If the property owner does not agree with the appeal at this level, they can appeal to the provincial appeals court, but only for a procedural review (it is not a court hearing). The appeals judge will confirm, modify, or rescind the notice. After all this, if the notice is not complied with, we contract the work out to a local contractor through a public bid process and the property owner is responsible to reimburse the municipality. If the property owner refuses to reimburse the municipality, we can notify the province who will reimburse us and apply the outstanding balance to the property tax bill next year once we provide all documentation that we have followed the proper process.

Similar, but different, here. We don't have the hazard levels, but send the notice and provide a means of appeal before a City board. Fail to comply or appeal, then we take you to court. Court says "tear it down", you don't, then court says "ok City, you tear it down". We do, you don't pay for it, we lien the property and then foreclose on the lien. Now we own it, and we sell it cheap so we can get a new house on it.

 

[Coder]

Simple as that. Same process here.

 

[fatboy]

I've only had to force a teardown of a complete house once. Took quite a while, a couple years start to finish, but ended up with a real nice new duplex on the lot.

 

[mtlogcabin]

The biggest question for the elected officials is "Have you budgeted funds to follow this through to the end" You may be able to lien the property but the vacant lot value may never cover the cost incurred by the local government.

 

[JCraver]

The biggest question for the elected officials is "Have you budgeted funds to follow this through to the end" You may be able to lien the property but the vacant lot value may never cover the cost incurred by the local government.

Foreclose on the lien, so then the City owns it. Sell it for a penny so someone can build a new house on it. New house = tax revenue = all that money comes back in the end.

 

[my250r11]

rely on documentation from the State for demolition permits verifying that the asbestos has been tested for and if found to exceed the trigger levels, abatement procedures are required and monitored.

We have to test any demo, if hot, abatement, clearance letters, then demo. State requires licences for ACM workers, haulers, inspectors, etc. Only a couple of landfills in the state that take ACM, some goes out of state to Arizona or Texas. If we demo a condemned structure we have to file for a State NESHAP, bid out abatement, and demo to contractors and put lien on property.

 

[mtlogcabin]

I think you missed my point. The local government has to have the cash upfront to pay for the demolition cost. They lien the property by placing the lien on the property taxes. That is usually a minimum 3 years of unpaid taxes before they can file for a tax deed. They can not sell government property for less than the appraised fair market value. As far as a pay back through taxes paid for their expense through taxes collected I suggest you look at you tax bill and see how much goes to the jurisdiction that incurred the expenses. My guess probably 10 to 15% of the total tax bill to the general fund. So a $2,000 per property tax would net the local government $600.00 per year it would be decades before the cost would be collected.
10% of my tax bill goes to the general fund %5 to the state, 67% to the schools the remaining 18% is divided to various other agencies such as sheriff, fire, land fill, water district etc.

If the demolished property is in a blighted area good luck on finding an investor to build a new home on it.

 

[JCraver]

Things/laws/rules/prices are different all over, but that's not how it works here.

Get the judgment to tear it down and hire a contractor. Normal house demo averages $6K. As soon as it's down you pay the contractor, and then send the landowner a bill for the amount. If they don't pay in 30 days, file the lien (and I don't know how you can lien a tax bill, but in IL the lien is against the real property itself). At the very same time the lien is filed, the City Atty files a foreclosure notice on that lien. Muni demo liens are "priority" liens in IL, so all other creditors are out. Process/litigate the foreclosure, then the City owns the lot. Sell it for as little as you can (80% of FMV here). At 80%: a normal residential infill lot in town is ~$6K, 80% is $4800. Sell it for $4800 and then you only have $1200 in it (6K demo - 4,8K sale). The $1200 the City is out is repaid at your $600 a year in 2 years, AND you've got a brand new house in town that'll be paying that $600/year for a long, long time. Maybe you don't sell it right away at $4800, but there's not many RE investors I know that wouldn't build a duplex on a sub-$5K lot in any part of most any town.

 

[Coder]

Thanks for all the feedback. hi ho hi ho a land banking we will go.