Tear 'er down - Ever use §110.3 to demolish?

[Code Neophyte]

In my reading of Section 110.3 (2006 IPMC), if you notice the owner of a dangerous property, they fail to comply or avail themselves of their administrative hearing, the AHJ can demolish the structure and lien the property. Has anyone used this provision - without a court order - to demolish a structure? Am I misinterpreting this or missing some other critical element to the process?

If you've used it, any "tips" as to how to defend the action when it's (inevitably) challenged in court??

 

[Jobsaver]

We drafted a Condemnation Ordinance modeled on, but that supercedes IPMC 110.3, establishing virtually the same process, but the City Council must vote on a condemnation before demolition.

http://cityofsherwood.net/ordinances/ord1531.doc

For condemnations, I create simple Word documents per a template created to thoroughly follow and document the required notification process, and to maintain a picture record showing and listing violations.

Excepting immediate life safety issues that can usually be addressed by removing utilities and boarding up properties, give plenty of notification time for each step in the process. The best defense is to show due diligence in the paperwork, and exercise patience, respecting private property laws in the course of performing your duties as a code officer.

 

[peach]

don't forget the whole due process deal, neo...

beauty is in the eye of the beholder... I guess so is danger..

always get a judge's blessing... or you'll be looking at well, a due process challenge.

Call the city attorney.

 

[Mark K]

In California there are detailed state statutes dealing with "substandard" residential buildings that wouldgovern over local ordinances.

Check with your city attorney to see if state laws apply.

 

[Code Neophyte]

Thanks for the replies so far. I am familiar with how we've "always done it" through a non-code-based state statute for "unsafe and dangerous" structures. It is very broad and general, and works best if the owner has completely abandoned the property (past-due taxes) - many times they're dead.

So my question is: Is there another avenue to the same result that uses an administrative process - like jobsaver suggested - that may be a bit more expeditious, but still provides the necessary due process?

As an example, if you had a partially-demolished structure, current taxes, numerous well-documented notices, no compliance - it's an attractive nuisance as it exists - infeasible to repair - are there ever circumstances like these in which you can just demolish and prove, if necessary, after the fact, that demolition was warranted?

 

[Code Neophyte]

Duplicate post......again

 

[mtlogcabin]

are there ever circumstances like these in which you can just demolish and prove, if necessary, after the fact, that demolition was warranted?

NO. The AHJ should secure the property and then follow the adopted procedure and always have approval from a judge or council before acutual demolition.

 

[Daddy-0-]

I have a similar one right now. Remember that a Notice of Unsafe Structure is not a Notice of Violation. We send the unsafe first. Let it expire. Send a Notice of Violation for failure to comply with the unsafe notice. In this NOV list 110.3 as a violation. After this expires you have exhausted all letter writing opportunities. At this point you hand it to the county attorney and ask them what they want to do.

 

[fatboy]

I have, but I had our Administrative Hearing Officers abatement order in hand. And, I didn't rush through it, made sure I followed all the requirements in 106, 107 and 108 as far as postings and notifications, backed up with copies and photos. That was last July, so far, so good, no lawsuits........yet.

 

[peach]

As long as you aren't the final "authority" making the determination, and you have your documentation (hint.. keep a copy with you.. like at home).. politically charged issues can very easily "disappear" when the lawyers step in.. CYA..

 

[Mule]

Our jurisdiction is like Daddy-O's. We are in the process of abatement as we speak. We sent a letter for an unsafe structure. The owner did not respond. We performed a title search and have sent notification of a public hearing before the Board of Appeals. The title search gives us all parties of interest...mortgage company, liens, etc. The Board of Appeals will render a decision on the property and order either fix it or tear it down.

We use an ordinance based on the minimum requirements in a State statute plus additional requirements that are in the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings book.

 

[Mule]

Our jurisdiction is like Daddy-O's. We are in the process of abatement as we speak. We sent a letter for an unsafe structure. The owner did not respond. We performed a title search and have sent notification of a public hearing before the Board of Appeals. The title search gives us all parties of interest...mortgage company, liens, etc. The Board of Appeals will render a decision on the property and order either fix it or tear it down.

We use an ordinance based on the minimum requirements in a State statute plus additional requirements that are in the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings book.