Memorandum

City of Lawrence

Planning & Development Services

 

TO:

David L. Corliss, City Manager

 

FROM:

Brian Jimenez, Code Enforcement Manager

 

CC:

Scott McCullough, Director Planning & Development Services

 

Date:

March 12, 2012

 

RE:

1233 New Jersey St.

 

 

Action Requested

Adopt Resolution No. 6965, setting a public hearing date of May 22, 2012, to review the condition of the dilapidated structure (blue two story house) located on the property and to consider declaring the structure unsafe and ordering the repair or removal within a specified period of time.

 

Background

The property is located on the west side of New Jersey St. and consists of a two story blue house and a detached accessory garage at the rear of the property which is accessed off the alley. 

 

The property is owned by Donna J. Morrison.  Ms. Morrison currently lives at 1129 Mark Blair Ct., Lawrence, Kansas and moved from the property many years ago.   It appears the house has been vacant for a lengthy period of time.  Staff initiated enforcement action in April of 2011 by sending Ms. Morrison a violation letter informing her that the property was blighted and that repairs needed to be made to the house to prevent the house from becoming a candidate for demolition. 

 

Soon after, staff was contacted by Keith Dabney, the son-in-law of Ms. Morrison.  Mr. Dabney advised staff he would be representing Ms. Morrison in all regards to the property as she is advanced in age and not in good health.  Mr. Dabney further advised that he would be making the repairs to the house and that he would have substantial repairs made with 60 days and he anticipated all repairs to be completed within 6 months.

 

Staff had numerous email and phone conversations with Mr. Dabney over the summer and into the fall regarding Mr. Dabney’s challenges to repair the structures on the property (theft of tools, squatters, etc.). 

 

Due to lack of progress through the end of the year, staff informed Mr. Dabney that the property would be presented to the City Commission as staff believed the house was a strong candidate to be demolished.

 

On February 6, 2012, staff mailed Ms. Morrison a letter informing her that repairs had not been made and the City was going to move forward with the process to present a resolution to the City Commission ordering the repair or demolition of the structure.

 

On March 6, 2012, staff obtained an administrative search warrant to inspect the property.  Staff executed the warrant on March 7, 2012.

 

Inspection Findings 

The house and garage were inspected in their entirety except staff could not access the crawl space and did not enter the attic space of the house. Staff determined the garage is structurally sound but is in need of paint.  The following pictures demonstrate the severe state of dilapidation that staff encountered during the inspection of the house.

 

First Floor/Second Floor

The condition of the interior of the first floor can be best described as “gutted” as there are no interior walls to provide room separation.  The floor of the southeast section was very weak which indicates there are considerable structural issues within the floor assembly.  Additionally, the wood lath of the ceiling is falling down in several areas.

 

The rear (west) exterior wall of the first floor is exposed in many areas as there are makeshift wood coverings applied to the entire length of the wall.   Much of the structural members of the west wall and roof assembly at this location are rotted.  A complete re-build of this wall would be required as would the floor assembly to the second floor in this area of the house.

 

There is structural wall members exposed in the northeast section of the first floor that are rotted.  The first floor walls and ceiling would need to be completely reframed.  All three bedrooms located on the second floor had wall coverings still intact.  Staff did observe numerous large horizontal and vertical cracks on the surface of the plaster to suggest there is structural movement occurring. 

 

Room Addition on Back of House

This addition has been partially removed.  The remaining structural elements/debris needs to be removed as this section of the house has no value in regards to structural integrity.

 

Foundation

As mentioned, staff could not access the crawl space to view the foundation but was able to view several areas of immediate concern from the exterior.  At the southwest and southeast corners of the house there is stone that is buckling, leaning or has stones that have fallen from the wall.  A third area of concern is the north foundation wall. Staff observed the wall leaning outward from the house.  It appears the house at this location is not being supported by the foundation.  Based on these observations, a reasonable conclusion is the entire foundation is in need of being re-constructed.  

 

Roof/Soffit/Siding

There roof appears to have multiple layers of shingles that are in poor condition.  The roof will need to be re-roofed which most likely includes roof sheathing.  There are multiple areas of rotted soffit board and siding that needs replaced.

 

Rehabilitation Costs

Due to the severe state of disrepair that was encountered by staff, the rehabilitation of the house is viewed as a complete “gut rehabilitation”.  Based on that opinion, a detailed cost analysis was not conducted.  Staff estimates the rehabilitation costs to be  minimally $156,600.00 based on the square footage of the house which is approximately 1,566 square feet.  Historically, the costs associated with “gut rehabs” from the City’s designated Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) is a minimum of $100.00 per square foot for these rehabilitations to be brought up to current building code standards.   

 

Staff’s Recommendation

Over the course of the last 10 months, staff has observed minimal progress on addressing the dilapidated conditions of the house..   As the narrative describes and the pictures confirm, the house is in very poor condition.  It will take a substantial effort and a significant amount of financial resources to rehabilitate the house.

 

In closing, it is staff’s opinion that the house  should be demolished unless Ms. Morrison or a new owner can demonstrate they have the financial resources to bring the property into compliance with all applicable City building codes. 

 

It is important to note that removing the house (principal structure) and allowing the garage (accessory structure) to remain creates a violation of the Development Code’s general standards for accessory structures.  Accessory structures are to be a subordinate part of a principal use and be clearly incidental to a principal use. Without a principal use (house) on the lot , the accessory structure is in violation of Section 20-533(2)(i).  Staff recommends identifying a time period for the garage to be removed and/or establishing a deadline for a replacement dwelling unit to be constructed.

 

In a recent development, Mr. Dabney submitted a demolition permit application on March 12, 2012 to demolish the house.  If the house is removed upon approval of the permit,  the violation case will be resolved without proceeding with the hearing on May 22, 2012.  In the meantime, staff requests the adoption of Resolution No. 6965, setting a public hearing date of May 22, 2012, to review the condition of the dilapidated structure (blue two story house) located on the property and to consider declaring the structure unsafe and ordering the repair or removal within a specified period of time.