Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSBB 2008-05-30 MinutesMINUTES OF THE SUBSTANDARD BUILDING BOARD CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS MAY 30, 2008 1. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 2:11 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL PRESENT Vice Chair Brian Crowson Place 2 Thomas Moreau Place 4 Philip Orr Place 7 Bob McCary Place 5 John Larriviere ABSENT Chairman Garry Cope 3. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES FROM MAY 30, 2008 Brian Crowson: The first order of business is the consideration of the minutes from our last meeting which was on Sept. 21, 2007. Are there any questions or comments about the minutes? If not, do I hear a motion? Philip Orr: I make a motion that we accept the minutes. Thomas Moreau: I second the motion. Brian Crowson: I have a motion and a second to accept the minutes of our last meeting. All those in favor? Let the record show that it was a unanimous aye. 4. SSB2008-14 PUBLIC HEARING FOR BLOCK 10 LOT 8 HILLVIEW ADDITION KNOWN AS 4123 MORGAN CIRCLE. Brian Crowson: Our first hearing for consideration today is SSB2008-14., Lot 8, Block 10, Hillview Addition, known as 4123 Morgan Circle. I'd like to hear the City's presentation. Dena Milner: I am Dena Milner. I work in the Code Enforcement Division of Neighborhood Services. I am here to present case SSB2008-14 located at 4123 Morgan Circle. This is an occupied property zoned R-2. An aerial map showing the general location is included in your presentation. April 8, 2008 -The interior and exterior of the structure were inspected. April 14, 2008 - A title search was requested. April 14, 2008 -The Notice and Order was sent. April 28, 2008 -The title search was received. May 15, 2008 -The Notice of Hearing was sent. May 15, 2008 -The Notice of Hearing was posted on the structure. May 27, 2008 -The exterior of the structure was inspected. May 30, 2008 -The exterior of the structure was inspected. Photo # 1 taken May 27, 2008 shows the dilapidated house located at 4123 Morgan Circle. Photo # 2 taken May 27, 2008 shows general dilapidation and improper maintenance. Photos # 3 & 4 taken April 8, 2008 show evidence of insect infestation. Photo # 5 taken May 30, 2008 & photo 6 taken May 27, 2008 show general dilapidation and improper maintenance of the accessory building. Photos # 7 & 8 taken May 27, 2008 show evidence of a deteriorated foundation. Photos # 9 & 10 taken April 8, 2008 show deteriorated flooring. Photos # 11 & 12 taken May 27, 2008 show ineffective waterproofing. Photo # 13 taken on May 30, 2008 & photo 14 taken May 27, 2008 show ineffective waterproofing and rotten wood. Photos # 15 & 16 taken May 27, 2008 show evidence of roof damage. Photos # 17 & 18 taken April 8, 2008 show evidence of ineffective waterproofing. Photos # 19 & 20 taken May 27, 2008 show evidence of ineffective waterproofing. Photos # 21 & 22 taken April 8, 2008 show exposed wires inside the structure. Photos # 23 & 24 taken April 8, 2008 show deteriorated drywall. Photos # 25 taken April 8, 2008 show plumbing which was not installed in accordance with code requirements. Staff recommendation on this property is repair or demolish should the owner not meet the board deadline, the board authorizes the City of North Richland Hills to demolish the structure and file a lien on the property. George Staples: In your opinion this property a substandard building within the definition with the City's ordinance? Dena Milner: In my opinion the structures located at 4123 Morgan Circle are substandard. Brian Crowson: Do we have any questions for the board? We have some representatives of the property here. If anyone wishes to speak please come up to the podium. Susan Renfro: I am the daughter [of the property owner]. We really do not have an interest in the property. We have made this known to several people. My mother had a stroke in November of 2002 and is paralyzed on her left side and I took care of her until early 2004. My father passed away in May of 2004. We do not want to put in the money to provide for the up keep of this house. Because of the foundation we can not get it insured. The storms last year really caused us a lot of problems. Without getting the foundation and roof fixed and putting a lot of money into it we can't even start maintenance. We do keep the lawn mowed. It's not that we don't want anything done with it; I have spoken to a company called Home Vesters. There is a mortgage on it for a home improvement loan that was done with foundation work back in the early 90's and due to the property and the creek behind it and everything it didn't take it but a few years to go bad again. We are trying to sell the house; we've had investor's looking at it. Now the problem they are having is in dealing with the code problems. The bank is not wanting to negotiate and get the price down low enough for the people that want to buy it to make a profit from it. This has been going on for over a year now. We really don't want it to go into foreclosure but that is my next step based on what happens today. We are not going to pay for the property. Brian Crowson: Are you the power of attorney? Susan Renfro: Yes. We have permits and paperwork regarding the inspections from 1990. Philip Orr: Do you know how much the market value is on the property? Susan Renfro: The remaining amount is somewhere around $50,000. I don't have the exact amount. Brian Crowson: Any other questions? Thank you very much. Would anyone else like to speak? Rob Schrickel: I'm with Home Vestors. We are the We Buy Ugly Houses people. We've been working with Ms. Renfro for over a year now and with the Bank. We've actually reduced the mortgage through our LMS company we are using. We've got it down close to where we think and investor would like the house. This is what we do, we deal with ugly houses. We're close to getting investor's to buy it, but right now they are scared because of all the permits and everything they are afraid they are going to have to go through with the city. Not that they wouldn't get a permit, but it's been that, we had one deal that would have gone through and the house would have been finished now but after the inspection he called and talked to someone with the city and was scared off. That was probably about a month ago. We're really close to getting an investor if we had a little more time; I think we could get someone in. The investor's don't want to be hounded too much. Bob McCary: What time frame are you talking about? Rob Schrickel: Probably 30 days. N. Richland Hills is a big market for us. When we get a house in it, it sells really quick. We have one possible investor with us here today listening in. I get calls on it at least once a day. We've been selling it for about a year. Jo Ann Stout: You said 30 days and you think that you can get it low enough for an investor to be interested? Then from that point on what do you think the time frame for the investor to bring it back up to code would be? Rob Schrickel: That depends on the investor but at least 3-4 months to get it where it should be. Brian Crowson: Sounds to me that you're acting as a realtor and not as a purchaser of this house. Rob Schrickel: This is considered an assignment, where we assign the contract over to an investor. Jo Ann Stout: My concern is that we have received several complaints on this property. When we went in to do the inspection it was open to vagrants to go inside. It's my recommendation that whatever time frame we give them is that we need to get something done with the property. George Staples: I would remind you that we deal with ugly houses too. You guys are not able to give them that kind of time without the detailed plan. You're limited on this. It doesn't sound like there is much hope of this turning within the near future. Brian Crowson: Do we have any other comments from the City or the floor? Philip Orr: It appears to me we have a hopeless situation here. This gentleman would like to sell it of course and the people who own it don't want to do. anything about it so I assume they are going to let North Richland Hills demolish it and have a lien put on it. Seems like that's where we are. Susan Renfro: If you guys demolish it and put a lien on, how long is that process? George Staples: We would have to give you 30 days to bring it up, then we'd have to give the lender the same period of time. Then we'd have to have it demolished. It's probably going to take us start to finish at least 75 days. We can't guarantee that. We contract it out. The lien would have to be satisfied from the property or the City just loses the money one way or the other. Nobody's looking to any of y'all for anything. Susan Renfro: Will anything fall back on us? I told them no. My mother is on social security. She can not afford the property or the upkeep. Is that a greater solution then trying to get an investor within the next 30 days and getting it fixed up? Is that going to be any quicker? Based on what he's saying I believe it may be somewhat quicker but the end result is then you have a vacant property that who's going to buy and do anything with. Eventually it's just going to be a vacant piece of property and especially if it has a lien on it that my mother's not going to pay. The reason I went to Home Vestors was because I didn't not want the property foreclosed on and sit there. I wanted to try to get it fixed up as soon as possible and get someone living there. They have tried really hard to sell this. My preference is to get it fixed up and not to leave a vacant lot there because we have one of those on our street where a house burned down and to me it's just as much an eye sore as a bad house. No one's going to buy in these older neighborhoods. I'm not sure a vacant lot is any better if we can get someone to buy this and fix it up. Brian Crowson: With all this paperwork that's being sent out to them and the bank, if they were to have somebody that wanted to purchase the house, what would that do for them? They bought the house and bring it up to code within that same 30 day time span. George Staples: If they were to sell it on day 29 there's no way in this world that they are going to meet the deadlines. If they were to do it on day 1 we'd probably try to figure out someway to accommodate them. We're not going to tear this thing down for a minimum of 70 days. If we were to get somebody coming in there before that and wanted to buy the thing and make a firm commitment, we'd probably try to have a special meeting for you guys to take a look at this. We don't want to have to do this. We're going to end up probably just owning the vacant piece of property. Selling it for the lien and bidding it in for whatever we got in it and that will wipe out the bank's lien. Our preference would be to have somebody bring it up. John Larriviere: My understanding is that the house has a lien on it for about $40,000? What would the house sell for if it was up to standard? Susan Renfro: Probably around $90,000. George Staples: Remember we are talking significant sums of money. We're not talking just cosmetic. It needs to be re-roofed, foundation problems are not inexpensive. It probably would require the mortgage hold to make some concessions. That's probably why Home Vestors can't sell it. John Larriviere: So if we demolish it, the then the bank is sitting with a $40,000 lien on a vacant piece of property? George Staples: No we will wipe their lien. Our liens are ahead of everybody else. If they want to buy it for the amount of our lien we'd sure as heck sell it to them. Again it's not going to be worth much. John Larriviere: What would the lien be about? George Staples: What's it going to cost us to take this down? Jo Ann Stout: Probably about $8,000 to $9,000. John Larriviere: So the property would be worth more then $9,000. George Staples: You'd think. We're not doing this to make money. Thomas Moreau: If they would secure the home that would as least be a start. Jo Ann Stout: No we wouldn't recommend that, it's substandard and we need to get it fixed. George Staples: We've got a roof that won't keep water out, foundation that's creeping ahead. If we have to we can mow vacant lots, but when it comes to a house, it's going to be tough for the people in the area to sell their houses if they choose to do so. We might as well step up to the bar and deal with it. John Larriviere: We make a proposal to demolish the house and if somebody comes up in the next few days or weeks... George Staples: Looks to me like a motion would be in order to find the property substandard and to order the owners to bring it up to standard within the 30 days or demolish and if they fail to do that then order the lien holder to do the same thing and if that doesn't happen then order the city to tear it down and put a lien on the property. John Larriviere: So that's 75 days? George Staples: It's 30 plus 30 plus whatever slippage we have because it's tough for us to get letters out instantaneously. Brian Crowson: Let's go ahead a make a motion. John Larriviere: I'll make a motion. Want to help me? George Staples: I think I just did...lt's called So Move. Thomas Moreau: I'll second that. Brian Crowson: All in favor say aye. Let the record show a unanimous vote. 5. Adjournment Brian Crowson: Motion to adjourn? Philip Orr: I'll make a motion to adjourn. John Larriviere: I'll second. Brian Crowson: All those in favor say aye. Let the record show it was unanimous. The Chairman adjourned the meeting at 2:38 p.m. Vice Chairman Y' i ~, ~ ~D ~JSOv( ~~ (,hairman•