Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSBB 2026-04-14 Minutes MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING SUBSTANDARD BUILDING BOARD OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS, HELD AT THE COUNCIL WORKROOM, 4301 CITY POINT DRIVE APRIL 14, 2026 The Substandard Building Board of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas met on the 14th day of April 2026 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Workroom. Present: Daniel Caulkins Place 1 Cynthia Ward Place 5 Brian Crowson Place 6, Chairman Hilary McMahon Place 7 Absent: John Cope Place 3 Caroline Martin Place 4 Staff Members: Kristin James Asst. Director of Neighborhood Services Annabelle Ackling Attorney Audrey Cappallo Executive Secretary Stefanie Martinez Managing Director Rayneice Home Lead Code Compliance Officer Brian Thomas Code Compliance Officer Zackary Loiselle Chief Building Official Cody Payne Assistant Building Official Mary Lous Salas Plans Examiner A. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Crowson called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. Chairman Crowson sworn in Lidia Rivera, Certified Spanish Translator, for property owner Misael Molina. Chairman Crowson also sworn in city staff Kristin James, Stefanie Martinez, Rayneice Horne, Brian Thomas, Zackary Loiselle, Code Payne and Mary Lou Salas, and property owners, Misael Molina, Luke Hammond, and John Frakes. B. PUBLIC COMMENTS - AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CITIZENS TO ADDRESS THE SUBSTANDARD BUILDING BOARD ON MATTERS WHICH ARE SCHEDULED ON THIS AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE BOARD, BUT NOT SCHEDULED AS A PUBLIC HEARING. IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THE SUBSTANDARD BUILDING BOARD DURING PUBLIC COMMENTS, A PUBLIC MEETING APPEARANCE CARD MUST BE COMPLETED AND PRESENTED TO Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 1 of 15 THE RECORDING SECRETARY PRIOR TO THE START OF THE SUBSTANDARD BUILDING BOARD MEETING. Chairman Crowson informed the Board that no one had signed up to speak during public comments. C.1 APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 14, 2025, SUBSTANDARD BUILDING BOARD MEETING. MRS. HILARY MCMAHON MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 14, 2025 SUBSTANDARD BUILDING BOARD MEETING. MR. DANIEL CAULKINS SECONDED THE MOTION MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED 4-0. C.2 SBB 2026-102 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION AS TO WHETHER THE STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4025 JACKIE LEE STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS BLOCK 1 LOT 5 S66'5-N6'6 BLK1 OF THE AUTREY, J L ADDITION IN THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS IS SUBSTANDARD WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE CITY'S ORDINANCES AND ORDER REPAIR OR DEMOLITION OF THE STRUCTURE. Chairman Crowson swore in staff member Kristin James. Mrs. James introduced city staff, Mary Lou Salas, Rayneice Horne, Brian Thomas, Cody Payne and Zackary Loiselle to the Board. Chairman Crowson called on Kristin James, Assistant Director of Neighborhood Services, to present the substandard case. Kristin James, Assistant Director of Neighborhood presented a case overview of the property located at 4025 Jackie Lee Street. • This case was initiated in December of 2023 after staff observed conditions that met the definition of a substandard structure. • The primary issues included deterioration of the exterior, such as rotted siding, fascia, and soffit. • The property owner did begin some repairs; however, those efforts were not completed and required permits were not maintained. • Staff have provided multiple notices and worked with the owner to try to bring the property into compliance. • The property remains out of compliance. Mrs. James presented an aerial map and zoning map of the property located at 4025 Jackie Lee Street and property is zoned R-3. Mrs. James presented the ownership information for the property based on Tarrant Appraisal District records. The current owner of record is shown to be, Mr. Misael Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 2 of 15 Mrs. James presented information regarding how the case progressed early on. In December of 2023, the case was opened after staff observed substandard conditions, including deteriorated and damaged wood on the structure. At that time, there was no contact at the residence, and a Notice of Violation was both posted and mailed. During a re-inspection in May of 2024, the structure was still substandard. The owner did make contact at that point and indicated that remodeling was underway, and a permit had been obtained. Mrs. James presented photos of the violation. By late June 2024, staff did observe some progress on the property. However, in July 2024, a permit issue was identified. Code Staff met on site with Building Inspections, and the owner was advised that a new permit would be required, as the previous permit had expired. So, while there was some initial movement toward compliance, the work was not completed and did not remain in compliance. Mrs. James presented photos showing the progress. Mrs. James presented information about permit-related issues and continued violations through mid to late 2024. In August 2024, the owner submitted a permit application; however, it was incomplete, and required engineered documents were not provided. By early September, the structure remained in violation, and a second Notice of Violation was issued. Later that month, a permit was approved and issued. During a re-inspection in December 2024, staff did observe good progress on the property. However, despite that progress, the work was not completed in a way that brought the structure fully into compliance. Mrs. James presented information about expired permits and ongoing non-compliance through 2025. In May 2025, the permit expired again while the structure was still under construction. By August 2025, staff confirmed with Building Inspections that there was no active permit on the property. In November 2025, the structure remained incomplete, and the permit had still not been renewed. So, at this point, the work had stalled, and the property remained out of compliance due to the lack of an active permit and incomplete construction. Mrs. James presented information about the escalation of enforcement in 2026. In February 2026, a Notice and Order was issued, which was both posted on the property and sent via certified mail. In March 2026, a Notice of Hearing was also posted and sent, formally setting this case for the Substandard Building Board. At that point, the case was moved forward for the Board's consideration. Mrs. presented information about the current condition of the property. The structure remains substandard and incomplete, and the required repairs have not been finalized. Permits have repeatedly expired, and the work has not been completed despite multiple opportunities to do so. At this point, the owner has not maintained compliance with the required permitting process, and the property remains out of compliance. Mrs. James presented the code violations that are present at the property and provided the applicable sections of Chapter 98 related to substandard structures. The structure meets the definition of substandard due to structural hazards, including deterioration of Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 3 of 15 wall and roof components. Staff observed conditions consistent with weakened or deteriorated structural members, which do not meet minimum safety standards. The code also addresses unsafe building systems and overall condition. The structure shows signs of inadequate maintenance and deterioration that impact its overall safety and integrity, including issues related to weather protection and the general condition of the structure. Additionally, the exterior condition and materials do not meet code requirements. Staff observed deteriorated exterior coverings and materials that are no longer providing proper protection, which contributes to the structure being considered substandard. Taken together, these conditions meet the definition of a substandard building under Chapter 98 of the City's Code of Ordinances. Mrs. James presented a photo of the Notice and Order that was mailed and posted on the property on February 11, 2026. Mrs. James also presented a photo of the Notice of Hearing that was mailed and posted on the property on March 19, 2026. Mrs. James presented current photos showing more of the structure and the ongoing work that has not been completed. While some repairs have been started, the structure remains incomplete and does not meet minimum standards. Overall, the property remains in a substandard condition. Mrs. James presented staff recommendation. It is the opinion of staff that this property is in violation of each portion of the NRH Code of Ordinances referenced in this presentation and is substandard. Staff recommend that the Substandard Building Board find the property to have substandard structure and order that: • All required permits be obtained within 15 days of the board order. • The structure be repaired within 30 days of the board order. • If the property owners fails to repair the substandard structure within 30 days, the lienholder(s) will be granted 30 days to repair the structure. • If the property owner fails to bring the property into compliance, the city should be authorized to bring the property owner back before the Substandard Building Board to request a civil penalty; o A civil penalty may be assessed against the property for failure to repair the structure within the allowed time frame in accordance with Chapter 98, Sec. 98-470. The penalty may be assessed at $1,000.00 per day that the property remained in violation of the Ordinances of the City of North Richland Hills since the Notice and Order was issued on February 11, 2026. Mrs. James asked the Board if they had any questions for the city. Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 4 of 15 Chairman Crowson asked if any other city staff member had anything to add to this case. No response from city staff. Chairman Crowson asked the Board if they had any questions for the city. Mr. Caulkins asked if the city knows if the structure is occupied. Mrs. James responded yes, it is occupied. Mrs. Ward asked if the foundation had been assessed on whether or not it is structurally sound. She noticed from the pictures that the door was at an angle. Mrs. James responded that there could be issued there but we didn't assess that. Mrs. James referred to plan examiner, Ms. Salas, to see if they had assessed the foundation. Mrs. Salas responded that when these permits were first applied back in 2021, and the garage conversion, they did do an inspection on the foundation slab and it did pass that. Also, when he had to do the garage additional, he also passed the inspection on the foundation on that. As for the existing house, no inspection was carried out on that as he wasn't doing any remodeling or any work in that area. The only portion they looked at was the garage. Chairman Crowson opened the public hearing and asked for anyone wishing to speak on the item to come forward. Mrs. McMahon asked if staff had an opinion on what led to the breakdown of communication with the owner. Mrs. James responded that at the beginning they didn't have a lot of communication with the property owner but had been in communication with the property owner since then. She doesn't think there was a lack of communication on the city or the property owner part but there was a lack of progress. Mrs. McMahon asked if we knew if the certified mail was picked up by the property owner or lienholder. Mrs. James stated this was included in the package. Mrs. McMahon wasn't sure what she was looking at in the package. Mrs. McMahon asked if the city could advise why this case wasn't taken to a hearing with Municipal Court. Mrs. James responded that staff chose not to take it to Municipal Court. Mrs. McMahon asked if staff had an opinion on why they made that determination. Mrs. Horne responded at the time he would make progress on the property and then stop. He would do what he needed to do then stop. It was always a back-and-forth process. The communication stopped so decided it best to go the Substandard Building Board route. Mrs. McMahon asked if the Board declares a property substandard can the property still be occupied. Mrs. James responded yes. Mrs. Ackling replied it depends if you include that in the motion and order that the occupant must vacate the property but if you don't include that then it won't be a requirement. Mrs. McMahon asked if there was a language barrier with the property owner. Mrs. James said yes, which is why we have an interpreter here and with all the conversations we have had with him. Mrs. McMahon asked if the city sent the notices in Spanish. Mrs. James responded no we didn't. Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 5 of 15 Chairman Crowson asked if there was a lienholder on the property. Mrs. James responded yes. They do have someone here tonight representing them. Chairman Crowson asked that Mr. Miseal Molina, property owner, Lidia Riviera, interpreter and Luke Hammond, contractor/lienholder representative, to stepped forward. Mr. Hammond stated that he met Mr. Molina that morning at the property and walked the property. He also spoke to Mr. Salas on the paperwork that is required. As for the timeline, getting permits within 15 days is going to be difficult because architectural drawings need to be redone and need to be sent over to engineering. He also needs to have those engineers go out to the property to look at what they have compared to what was drawn so we can get accurate drawings. Once the permits get issued, it will be about a 90-day project. Chairman Crowson asked Mr. Hammond how many days does he think needs for the permits to be pulled. Mr. Hammond responded 30 days. Chairman Crowson replied and at that point you will get with the city with a timeline on getting this taken care of. Mr. Hammond responded absolutely. Chairman Crowson asked if he had discussed this with Mr. Molina. Mr. Hammond responded no, he has not discussed this with Mr. Molina. He was under the direction of Capital Plus to get it resolved. Chairman asked Mr. Hammond that Capital Plus, lienholder, hired you. Mr. Hammond replied that is correct. Chairman asked Mr. Molina if he would like to say something. Mr. Molina stated the one issue he has always had was finances. There was no other reason. It's not that he didn't want to complete the work but he didn't have the finances to do the work. Chairman Crowson asked that this case has been going on since 2021 what was the problem back then did have a project manager back then or was he trying to do the work himself. Mr. Molina responded that he hired a company. They did the blueprint and helped with everything else with the permits. He has never done this by himself. Chairman Crowson asked if he is going to give Mr. Hammond those blueprints or is he going to have to start all over. Mr. Hammond replied he doesn't know about that as the pictures from today and the blueprint look different. Mrs. Ward asked Mr. Molina if finances have been an issue up to this point, are you going to be able to complete the repairs and bring the property into compliance. Mr. Molina responded that Capital Plus is helping him with a loan. Chairman Crowson asked Mr. Hammond if the Board gives him 30 days to pull permits, how many days will be needed to complete this project. Mr. Hammond responded 2 to 3 months. It really is going to depend on when we do our first inspections on whether we find other issues. Often these things can grow once they are tagged substandard Mrs. Ward asked Mr. Hammond if Capital Plus is helping him with the loan, what is the amount of the loan as I'm sure it's not an open-ended loan and you are just getting into this. Mr. Hammond responded true, but I wasn't given a bracket amount, and I have worked with them for a long time and there will be no issues getting this done. Mr. Caulkins replied also, assuming this is self-serving for Capital Plus as they are Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 6 of 15 protecting their lien right. Mr. Hammond responded absolutely. They would rather invest more in the house now than have one torn down due to the fact it is substandard. Chairman Crowson asked if anyone else would like to speak on this case. Chairman Crowson closed the public hearing. The Board discussed the case and different options. Chairman Crowson asked Mr. Molina if any children live in the household. Mr. Molina responded that he is the only one that occupies the property, only in the evenings. The children do not live there. Chairman Crowson replied he is confused that you only occupy the residence in the evenings. Mr. Molina responded yes that is correct as he works in the day. Chairman Crowson replied he lives there. Mr. Molina replied yes. MR. DANIEL CAULKINS MOVED TO ENTER THE FOLLOWING ORDER FOR SBB 2026-102 THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4025 JACKIE LEE STREET LEGALLY DESCRIBED BLOCK 1, LOT 5 S66'5-N6'6 BLK 1 OF THE AUTREY, J L ADDITION IN THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IS HEREBY FOUND TO BE A SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURE BY REASON OF CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE NOTICES OF THIS HEARING. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT ALL NECESSARY PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED WITHIN 30 DAYS; AND ALL WORK TO REPAIR OR DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE AND DEBRIS REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 90 DAYS. IF THE OWNER FAILS TO REPAIR OR DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE WITHIN THE SPECIFIED TIME PERIOD, THE LIENHOLDER(S) AND MORTGAGEES SHALL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS TO COMPLETE SUCH REQUIRED REPAIRS OR DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE. IF THE STRUCTURE IS NOT REPAIRED OR DEMOLISHED AND THE DEBRIS REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF TIME REFERENCED IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS, THE CITY SHALL DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE AND CHARGE ALL EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CITY TO THE OWNER AND A LIEN PLACED ON THE PROPERTY TO RECOVER ITS COST. MR. CYNTHIA WARD SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED 4-0. C.3 SBB 2026-104 PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION AS TO WHETHER THE STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5109 PEARL DRIVE, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS BLOCK 3, LOT 3R OF THE RICHLAND OAKS SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS HAS UNLAWFUL ACCUMULATION OF TRASH AND DEBRIS WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE CITY'S ORDINANCE, ORDER THE REMOVAL OF THE ACCUMULATION, DECLARE THE STRUCTURE AS SUBSTANDARD WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE CITY'S ORDINANCES, AND ORDER REPAIR OF THE STRUCTURE. APPROVED Chairman Crowson called on Kristin James, Assistant Director of Neighborhood Services, to present the substandard case. Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 7 of 15 Kristin James, Assistant Director of Neighborhood presented a case overview of the property located at 5109 Pearl Dr. • The property has had ongoing violations since April of 2022. Over that time, the structure has continued to show signs of deterioration and meets the definition of substandard conditions under the code. • In addition to the structural concerns, there has been a consistent accumulation of trash and debris throughout the property. • Staff have made multiple attempts to gain compliance, including issuing notices, pursuing court action, and offering assistance to the property owner. • Despite those efforts, the property remains out of compliance. Mrs. James presented an aerial map and zoning map of the property located at 5109 Pearl Drive and property is zoned R-1. Mrs. James presented the ownership information for the property based on Tarrant Appraisal District records. The current owner of record is shown to be John Frakes. This is the individual staff has been working with throughout the duration of the case. Mrs. James presented information regarding how the case progressed and early enforcement through 2022. In April of 2022, staff initiated the case after observing accumulation of trash and debris, along with substandard structural conditions, including peeling paint and deteriorated wood. Notices of violation were issued for both the accumulation and the structural concerns. Follow-up inspections over the next several months showed no improvement, and additional notices were issued. By the end of 2022, the property remained in violation with no communication from the owner. Mrs. James presented photos of the violations at the property and the structural damage on the exterior of the property. Mrs. James presented information on court action and continued violations throughout 2023 and 2024. Due to continued non-compliance, the case was filed with the court in March of 2023. In April 2023, the owner was found guilty, fines were assessed, and they were ordered to bring the property into compliance, including repairs to both the main structure and an accessory structure. As of June 2024, there was still no progress, no active water service, and no communication from the owner. In August 2024, the owner did make contact, indicated they were unable to complete repairs, and staff offered assistance through the Neighborhood Initiative Program. However, the violations remained Despite that order, the property continued to deteriorate, and the accessory structure eventually collapsed. Additional photos provided of the damage to the exterior of the property. Mrs. James presented information on the continued deterioration of the property through 2025. In January 2025, staff made contact with a family member of the owner, and a plan to address the issues was discussed. However, during a re-inspection in October 2025, the structure remained substandard, with further deterioration observed. Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 8 of 15 Accumulation of debris was still present, including the collapsed accessory structure. By December 2025, there was still no improvement. The property remained in the same condition, violations were clearly visible from the public right-of-way, and an additional Notice of Violation was issued. Overall, despite communication and additional opportunities to correct the issues, the property continued to decline." Additional photos provided of the code violations at the property. Mrs. James presented information about the escalation of enforcement in 2026. Due to the lack of progress over several years, the case escalated in 2026. Notices were issued advising of a hearing before the Substandard Building Board, and the case was being brought forward for the Board's consideration. Mrs. presented information about the current condition of the property. The structure remains substandard and continues to show deterioration. There is still accumulation of debris on the property, and the accessory structure has collapsed and remains on site. Overall, the property has shown no meaningful progress since the case was initiated in 2022. Despite multiple notices, court action, and offers of assistance, the property remains out of compliance. Mrs. James presented the code violations that are present at the property and provided the applicable sections of the nuisance provisions under Section 34-33. Based on staff inspection, the property is in violation due to the accumulation of debris, rubbish, and discarded materials. These conditions are considered a public nuisance because they can lead to decay, create offensive odors, and provide harborage for insects and rodents. The code also prohibits the storage or dumping of these types of materials on private property or in the right-of-way, which is what we observed in this case. Mrs. James presented the code violations that are present at the property and provided the applicable sections of Chapter 98 related to substandard structures. The structure is considered substandard due to inadequate sanitation and issues with weather protection. Specifically, the code identifies conditions such as lack of required utilities, including hot and cold running water, and deterioration of the exterior structure. In this case, staff observed conditions consistent with deteriorated or ineffective weather protection, including damage to exterior components and lack of proper protective coverings. These types of deficiencies allow the structure to deteriorate further and do not meet minimum housing standards. Mrs. James presented a photo of the Notice and Order that was mailed and posted on the property on February 11, 2026. Mrs. James also presented a photo of the Notice of Hearing that was mailed and posted on the property on March 19, 2026. Mrs. James presented photos of the current accumulation on the property. There are various items stored and scattered throughout the yard, including debris, discarded materials, and household items. These conditions contribute to an unsanitary environment and are consistent with the nuisance violations previously discussed. Mrs. James presented photos of the current conditions of the structure. You can see visible deterioration, including damage to exterior components and areas where the Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 9 of 15 structure is no longer properly protected from the elements. These conditions reflect the ongoing substandard nature of the structure. Mrs. James presented staff recommendation. It is the opinion of staff that this property is in violation of each portion of the NRH Code of Ordinances referenced in this presentation and is substandard. Staff recommend that the Substandard Building Board find the property to have substandard structures and order that: • All accumulation must be removed within 15 days. • All required permits be obtained within 15 days. • The structure must be repaired within 30 days of the board order. • If the property owner fails to remove the accumulation within 15 days, the lienholder(s) will be granted 15 days to remove the accumulation. • If the property owners fails to repair the substandard structure within 30 days, the lienholder(s) will be granted 30 days to repair the structure. • If the property owner fails to bring the property into compliance, the city should be authorized to bring the property owner back before the Substandard Building Board to request a civil penalty; o A civil penalty may be assessed against the property for failure to repair the structure within the allowed time frame in accordance with Chapter 98, Sec. 98-470. The penalty may be assessed at $1,000.00 per day that the property remained in violation of the Ordinances of the City of North Richland Hills since the Notice and Order was issued on February 11, 2026. Mrs. James asked the Board if they had any questions for the city. Mrs. Ward asked how big is the collapse building. Mrs. James responded that it is a shed. Mrs. Horne responded that it is a metal shed in the backyard. Mrs. James presented a photo of the collapse shed to the Board. Mrs. McMahon stated she noticed that a lot of information presented was related to Chapter 34, nuisance and Chapter 98 and wanted to know if the Board has authority to address Chapter 34 cases. Mrs. Ackling responded yes, the Board has the ability to abate nuisances and Substandard Building under the Substandard Building Board. Mrs. McMahon asked based on staff recommendation, is staff asking that both primary residence and accessory structure be declared substandard. Mrs. James responded that it would be just the primary residence as the accessory structure would be considered part of the nuisance as it has now collapsed. Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 10 of 15 Mrs. McMahon asked Mrs. James if city staff have an opinion about the feasibility about getting permits for repairs within 15 days. Mrs. James responded that permits may not be required for this but she would deferred to Mr. Loiselle for a response. Mr. Loiselle responded that he hasn't been out to the property but based on some photos presented such as one looked like you could see through roof which may or may not require a permit. It depends on how extensive it is. Mrs. James responded that we are looking at it, as them applying for a permit and starting that process. Mrs. McMahon asked Mrs. James to go back to her deterioration slides for 2025 as she was having a hard time understanding the dangerousness and if Mrs. James could walk her through those pictures. Mrs. James responded that the garage doors are deterioration of not proper weatherization. This is a continuation of deterioration from the initial inspection pictures of the side of the house and the eave of house, and it has gotten worse throughout the years. Mrs. James said in the photo presented is a tree that has grown through the house on the inside of the window. Mrs. James also showed photos taken the day of the hearing showing a hole in the eave of the house that you can see through. Mrs. Horne responded that it is in front of the house. It's on the overhang of the porch. Mrs. Ward asked what is the Neighborhood Initiative Program that was offered to the homeowner. Mrs. James responded it's the Neighborhood Initiative Program that we offer to any residents that is eligible for exterior home repairs. It would be for veterans, the elderly, the disable, and single parents and low income is a requirement. We look at the value of the house and if it fits within a certain criteria. The house values have increased over the years and currently thrush hold is at $300,000. It is voluntary driven and donation driven. Mrs. Ward asked if an offer was extended. Mrs. James responded that no offer was extended because he didn't qualify for the program. He owes taxes on the house and there was also a value issue. Mrs. Ward asked if there is a lienholder on the property. Mrs. James and Horne responded no, they don't believe so. Mrs. Crowson asked if anyone was living at the residence. Mrs. James responded yes, the owner, Mr. Frakes. Chairman Crowson asked the Board if they had anymore questions for the Board. Chairman Crowson opened the public hearing and asked for anyone wishing to speak on the item to come forward. Mr. Frakes stepped forward. Mr. Frakes informed the Board that he was out of town for about a year and three months taking care of his mother as she broke her leg. He did let things go down and you all have well documented. While he was gone, he spent $1,600 on the backyard. They screwed a bunch of things into the backyard. It was a waste of money. In the last 24 months he spent money on having tree and tree limbs removed. He requested Mrs. James to photo of the trees, and he showed the Board which ones were removed. He stated those trees were complaints. He has complaints going back to 2022. He replied he was not sure about the current complaints. He agrees based on the photos that there needs to be roof repairs, the garage doors need to be repaired. He has done some clean up on the front porch and all around the south side of the house. He was immediately written up again for the stuff in front of the garage. Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 11 of 15 Mr. Frakes informed the Board that he was fired 3 years ago and has chronic depression. Mr. Frakes informed the Board that he asked for this paperwork so he could prepare his case as he had lost all his paperwork from switching cars and being out of town. This paperwork, Substandard Standard Building Board Presentation, is missing a lot of paperwork. He wants to come back into compliance. He has a contractor who is willing to work with him. He doesn't want to be here in three with a bunch of new stuff written up. Mr. Frakes stated if you drive down his street and look at his house, it doesn't look bad but the pictures shown tonight do make it look bad. Chairman Crowson asked if there is water service at the house. Mr. Frakes responded no. It got turned off when he was out of town taking care of his mother. He manages just fine with just himself. The property is not a danger to anyone. There is nothing structurally wrong with the house. There is a hole in the roof that needs to be fixed. This Board has seen the pictures and can see there is nothing structural wrong with the house. Mr. Frakes asked Mrs. James to go to the picture that shows the hole in the roof in the presentation. Mr. Frakes asked what that in the middle of that picture is shown. Mrs. James replied it's a crack showing the foundation. Mrs. Frakes responded there isn't a house in NRH that doesn't' have cracks. Mrs. James responded it is still substandard at this point. Mrs. Frakes replied when they redid the street Strummer, which used to be straight, now it curves. The city put in a drain and the water runs back up drains into his backyard along with his neighbors. It doesn't flood his house but it does erode the foundation. I do have foundation problems but wasn't caused by me but by the city with the work they did on Stummers. He hasn't complained to the city about it as he likes living in North Richland Hills but now you all are complaining about it and the big chuck of that issue belongs to the city. Mr. Frakes informed the Board that he started cleaning up the accumulation and immediately got written up again for other stuff. He got written up for the trash sitting Infront of the garage. I moved them to the side and got written up for that too. Mrs. Frakes asked Mrs. James to go to another picture in the presentation of a tree in his living room. Mr. Frakes stated that was a rubber tree in his living room. That tree is not growing up from inside his house. Mrs. James went to another picture in the presentation that showed a tree on the exterior of the house. Mr. Frakes stated the city complained about that tree and he had that tree removed. They complained about the vines growing up on the house, which he did had those removed along with some shrubs in the last 24 months. There has been movement and work done but every time there is he is back in trouble for something else. A lot of it is his fault. Mr. Frakes asked Mrs. James to go to another picture showing him the truck. You can see that the truck had an old dilatated drafting storage bin and that had been removed. There are couple of tires in the bed of the truck, but you can't see the tires from street. Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 12 of 15 The air conditioner in the yard has been removed from the yard. The front porch has been cleaned. There has been movement. It's not like he hasn't done anything. Mrs. James pointed out a photo taken in 2025 showing accumulation out in front of the garage. Mr. Frakes replied yes, there is still some there. Mrs. James showed pictures taken that current day by Officer Thomas showing accumulation and the accumulation still in the bed of the truck. Mr. Frakes replied he doesn't understand why the accumulation and tires in his bed of his truck are in violation as no one can see it from the street. Mr. Frakes informed the Board that he will be going back to Amarillo to take care of his mom again as she broke some ribs and punctured a lung so he trying to get this taken care of before he leaves. Mrs. Ward asked for the Neighborhood Initiative Program is Mental Health considered a disability as Mr. Frakes stated he deals with Chronic Depression. Mrs. James responded yes, we have provided help with Mental Health in the past. We don't question when some states they have disability. Mrs. Ward asked would be that make him quality for the NIP program. Mrs. James responded that he owes back taxes which disqualifies him for the program. He owes $6,200 in back taxes. Mr. Frakes responded that those are currently being paid. He said he has a payment plan, and he just paid $2,000 about a month ago. Mrs. James responded that the tax office shows $6,200. Mr. Frakes replied that is about right as he did owe about $8000 and he paid $2,000. His payment plan is to pay $2,000 a month which he doesn't have as he is now unemployed. Chairman Crowson asked Mr. Frakes what his plan is to bring the property into compliance. Mr. Frakes responded that he has just started working with Tucker construction and he must work with his finances and I don't know what his schedule is. The little stuff like the items in front of the garage he can take care of himself, but he can't change the garage doors or repair the eave of the roof himself. Mr. Frakes replied he can't offer a timeframe. Mr. Caulkins replied if you can't offer us a timeframe then we will have to provide you with a timeframe. Mr. Frakes replied he really didn't talk about timeframe with the contractor. He doesn't know what the contractor workload is. The construction company is Tucker Construction. Chairman Crowson asked Mr. Frakes if he had anything else he would like to the say to the Board. Mr. Frakes responded that he wants them to know that he has spent $3,200 on the front of the property and $1,600 on the back of the property even though it still looks bad. The front is better but not up to code. He has made efforts in the last 24 months. He must go back to Amarillo again to help his mom, which is why he hired the contractor. He can take care of it. The garage doors need to be fixed, the eaves need to be fixed, and he needs to know exactly what needs to be done. The shed in the back needs to be taken care of, which he gets and the accumulation of trash in the back. Mrs. James informed the Board that staff can come out to the house and meet with Mr. Frakes, but city staff have already come out to the house before telling Mr. Frakes what needed to be done. Mr. Frakes replied he is paying a guy to do the work. Mrs. James Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 13 of 15 replied we can also meet with your contractor on site. Mr. Frakes replied I guess that is the best you all can do. I really wanted something in writing stating fix this, fix that and you'll be good. Mrs. James replied that is usually provided in the notice. Mr. Frakes replied, yeah, but like he explained earlier he has been gone and missed a bunch of notices. He's not very good with paperwork. Mrs. Ward asked Mr. Frakes if he declined the help from the Neighborhood Initiative Program. Mr. Frakes replied he was never offered that. Mrs. James replied that he never applied for it and he doesn't' quality in the fact he owes back taxes. She would also have to look at the value of the house as he might have been disqualified based on that too. We have a lot of NRH residents that apply and we don't have a huge budget either. Chairman Crowson asked if anyone else would like to speak on this case. Chairman Crowson closed the public hearing. The Board discussed the case and different options. MR. DANIEL CAULKINS MOVED TO ENTER THE FOLLOWING ORDER FOR SBB 2026-104 THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5109 PEARL DRIVE LEGALLY DESCRIBED BLOCK 3, LOT 3R OF THE RICHLAND OAKS SUBDIVISION IN THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IS A NUISANCE AND THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IS HEREBY FOUND TO BE A SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURE BY REASON OF CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE NOTICES OF THIS HEARING. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT ALL UNLAWFUL ACCUMULATION OF TRASH AND DEBRIS BE REMOVED FROM THE PROPERTY WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THIS ORDER. ALL NECESSARY PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED WITHIN 30 DAYS; AND ALL WORK TO REPAIR OR DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE MUST BE COMPLETED WITHIN 60 DAYS. IF THE OWNER FAILS TO REMOVE THE UNLAWFUL ACCUMULATION OF TRASH AND DEBRIS WITHIN 30 DAYS, THE CITY MAY ABATE THE NUISANCE AND THE PROPERTY OWNER WILL BE LIABLE FOR ALL FEES AND EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CITY AND A LIEN PLACED ON THE PROPERTY TO RECOVER ITS COSTS. IF THE OWNER FAILS TO REPAIR OR DEMOLISH THE SUBSTANDARD STRUCTURE WITHIN 60 DAYS THE LIENHOLDER(S) AND MORTGAGEES SHALL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS TO COMPLETE SUCH REPAIRS. IF THE STRUCTURE IS NOT REPAIRED OR DEMOLISHED AND THE DEBRIS REMOVED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF TIME REFERENCED IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS, THE CITY SHALL DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE AND CHARGE ALL EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE CITY TO THE OWNER AND A LIEN PLACED ON THE PROPERTY TO RECOVER ITS COST. MR. CYNTHIA WARD SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED 4-0. D. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Crowson adjourned the meeting at 7:33 p.m. Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 14 of 15 Acting Chairman/Chairman ATTEST: Acting ecutive Secretary Substandard Building Board Meeting April 14, 2026 Page 15 of 15