No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3487RESOLUTION NO. 3 4 8 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING THE CITY TO EXPEND FUNDS TO ABATE THE WEED NUISANCE AT 4 PIKE STREET SE, IN THE CITY OF AUBURN, AND AUTHORIZING A LIEN FOR LABOR AND MATERIALS. WHEREAS, Chapter 8.20 of the Auburn City Code provides for an enforcement mechanisms for the City to address unlawful activity involving uncontrolled weeds and vegetation; and WHEREAS, the code provision empower the City to take corrective action when efforts to have the property owner cure the weed problem have been unsuccessful; WHEREAS, City Code Enforcement staff have met with, communicated with and have given correction notices to the owner of the property at 4 Pike Street SE, in the City of Auburn, which efforts have been inadequate to prompt the owners to correct the uncontrolled weed and vegetation problem at that property; and WHEREAS, because of the health and safety problems, as well as the unsightly impacts "of the uncontrolled weed and vegetation growth at that location, and because of the failures of the property owners to take action to correct the problems, it is appropriate that City staff be authorized to remove the uncontrolled weed and vegetation from the premises and to impose a lien on the property for the costs of such corrective action. Resolution 3487 June 17, 2002 Page 1 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: Section '1. FINDING OF NUISANCE. That the City Council finds that the accumulation of uncontrolled weed and vegetation at the property located at 4 Pike Street SE, Auburn, Washington., constitutes a nuisance warranting corrective action necessary to preserve the public health, safety and welfare, and that the property' owners have failed to take corrective action after due notice of the problems and concerns caused by the uncontrolled weed and vegetation at the property located at 4 Pike Street SE, Auburn, Washington. A copy of recent notices, correspondence and photographs concerning the weeds are collectively identified as Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. SectiOn 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR ABATEMENT AND LIEN. That The Mayor of the City of Auburn is herewith authorized to utilize City resources to remove the uncontrolled weed and vegetation from the property located at 4 Pike Street SE, Auburn, Washington, and to have a lien placed on said property to recover the City's cost of labor and materials. Section 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Resolution shall take effect and be in full force upon passage and signatures. Resolution 3487 June 17,2002 Page 2 Dated and Signed this ['"f'~ay of June, 2002. CITY OF AUBURN PETER B. LEWIS MAYOR ATTEST: Danfelle E. D~skam, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Resolution 3487 June 17, 2002 Page 3 EXHIBIT "A" Weed NUisance 4 Pike Street SE' Auburn, Washington t/(oO2_~o i~ I 25 W MAIN ST * AUBURN, WA * 98001-4998 Telephone: 253.931.3000 June 6, 2002 Victor Golka 2800 S. 224t~ St Des Moines WA 98198 RE: 4 Pike Street SE Property Dear Mr. Golka: 'I have attemPted to contact you several times at work. While you have returned some of the calls, I have not been able to make direct contact with you. Your property on Pike Street has been in a state of disrepair for some time. ' A number of complaints have been filed against the property~ You have spoken to our Code Enforcement Officer about these problems several times and have received several notices to correct violations. TO date you have never.completed all of the needed repairs and have only done the minimum mount of work necessary to stop any immediate action. Please contact me right away concerning how you will prOceed to bring this property up to the .condition that you have stated was going to take place when speaking to our Code EnfOrcement Officer, so it will not be necessary for me to take this to Council for further action. Sincerely, Pgter B. Lewis Mayor J~931.3060' CITY OF AUBURN PARTMENT OF PuBLIc WORKS DIVISION OF BUILDING AND LAND USE CODES ENFORCEMENT NOTICE OF HEARING Case No. VIO02-0191 PURSUANT TO CITY OF AUBURN ORDINANCE NO. 4460 YOU ARE HEREBY ORDERED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER AT 7:00 PM., ON Tuesday~ July 16~ 2002, IN THE CITY OF AUBURN CITY HALL, 25 WEST MAIN, ROOM//3, AUBURN, WA 98001-4998. Hearing Examiner Procedural Rules are contained in ACC, 1.25.100 and attached to this form for your convenience. Failure to appear before the Hearing Examiner may result in a finding of violation and order assessing monetary penalties in your absence.. The City of Auburn Codes Compliance Officer notified you on May 6~ 2002, and again on May 16~ 2002, that the below-described location was maintained or used in violation of codes, ordinances, standards, regulations, procedures or permits of the City of Auburn. You were requested to correct all violations by May 10~ 2002. A reinspection or review on May 30~ 2002, revealed that you have 'failed to comply with this request. Location of Violation: 4 Pike St. SE, Auburn, WA 98002 Issued to: Golka, Victor J. Address of person Notice is issued to: P.O. Box 3806, Kent, WA 98032/2800 S. 224th'st. Des Moines, WA 98198-5199. ' ..- Code, Ordinance, Standard, Regulation, Procedure or Permit Violated: Auburn City Code (ACC) Title 8, Chat~ter 8.20, Section 8.20.010. Description of Violation: Yard is overgrown with grass, weeds and dandelions. Corr'ective Action Required: The yard must be mowed and the weeds must be controlled. Yard must be put on a regular maintenance program to keep grass at or below legal permitted height of six- inches. The $50.00 l~er day fine which w~s applied at the time of issuance of the NOTICE OF FAILURE TO CORRECTION VIOLATION is continuing to accrue for every day that the violation continues. The Codes Compliance Officer (253-804-5094) must be notified when the corrections have been accomplished and a confirmation inspection will be conducted T p ryP . , prior to the hearing, he im osed moneta enalties are payable by cash, money order, or cashier's check, to the City of Auburn Finance Department at Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main, Auburn, WA 98001-4998. Method and Date of Service: Mailed:May 30, 2002 Served: Posted: May 30, 2002 Issuing Party: T.Michael Dunbar Title: Codes Compliance Officer REF. VIO002-0191 (Notice of Hearing) CITY OF AUBUKN CODES COMPLIANCE HEARING EXAMINER RULES OF PROCEDURE CITy OF AUBURN CODES COMPLIANCE HEARING EXAMINER RULES OF PROCEDURE AUBURN CITY CODE (ACC)~ CHAPTER 1.25, SECTION 1.25.100 HEARING EXAMINER': Hearing Before the Hearing Examiner 1. Procedure. (a) Record. A record of the entire proceedings shall be made by tape recording or by any other means of permanent recording determinedto be appropriate by the Hearing Examiner. A transcript of the proceedings shall be made available to all parties upon request, and upon payment of the fee prescribed therefor. Such fees may be established by the Hearing Examiner, but shall in no event be greater than the cost involved. Co) The proceedings at the hearing may also be reCorded by a-court repOrter if requested and arranged for by any party thereto. All such costs and expense for such court reporter shall be borne by the requesting party. COntinuances. The Hearing Examiner may grant continuances for gOod cause shown. (c) Oaths - Certification. In any prOceedings under this section, the Hearing~ Examiner has the power to administer oaths and affirmations and to certify to official acts. (d) (e) Reasonable DiSpatch. The Hearing Examinershall proceed with reasonable dispatch to conclude any matter before him/her, Due regard shall be shOwn for the convenience and necessity of any parties or their representatives. Subpoenas..The Hearing Examiner may issue subpoenas upon the request of any party. The City Attorney, Assistant City AttorneY and City Prosecutor are also authorized to issue subpoenas. When so required, the applicant for the subpoena shall show to the satisfaction of said individual the general relevance and reasonable scope of the evidence sought.. CITY OF AUBURN · CODES COMPLIANCE HEARING EXAMINER RULES OF PROCEDURE e Conduct of Hearing (a) Rules. Hearings need not be conducted according to the technical rules relating to evidence and witnesses. Co) Oral Evidence. Oral evidence shall be taken only on oath or affirmatiOn. (c) Hearsay .Evidence. Hearsay evidence may be used for the purpose of supplementing or explaining any direct evidence, but shall not be sufficient in itself to support a finding unless it wOuld be admissible over objection 'in civil actions in courts of competent jurisdiction in this state. (d) (e) Admissibility of Evidence. Any relevant evidence shall be admitted if it is the type of evidence on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs, regardless of the existence of any common law or statutory role which might make imprOper the admission of such evidence over objection in civil actions in courts of competent. jurisdiction'in this state. Exclusion of Evidence. Irrelevant and unduly repetitioUs evidence shall be excluded. (f) Rights of Parties. Each party Shall haVe these rights among others: (1) To call and examine witnesses on any matter relevant to the issues of the hearing; (2) To introduce documentary and physical evidence; (3) To cross-examine opposing witnesses on any matter relevant to the issues of the hearing;' (4) To impeach any witness regardless of which party first called him .to testify; (s) (6) To rebut the evidence against him; To represent himself Or to be represented bY anyone of his choice who is lawfully permitted to do so. (g) Official Notice. (1) What may be noticed. In reaching a decision, official notice may be taken, either before or after submission of the case for decision, of any fact which may be judicially noticed by the courts of this state or official records of departments and ordinances of the city. (2) Parties to be notified. Parties present at the hearing shall be informed of the matters to be noticed and these matters shall be noted in the record, referred to therein, or appended thereto. 3 CITY OF AUBURN CODES COMPLIANCE HEARING EXAMINER RULES OF PROCEDURE (3)" Opportunity to refute. Parties present at the hearing shall be given a reasonable oppommity, on request, to refute the official noticed matters by evidence or by written or oral presentation or authority, the manner of such refutation to be determined by the Heating Examiner. (4) Inspection of the premises.' The Hearing Examiner may inspect any building or premises involved in the violation. The Heating Examiner shall state for the record upon completion of the ' inspection the material facts observed and the conclusions drawn therefrom. Each party then Shall have a right to rebut or explain the matters so stated by the Heating Examiner. (h) 'Documentary Evidence. Documentary evidence maybe received in the form of copies2 ge (i) Limitation of Testimon¥, The Hearing Examiner has the right to limit the time a witness may testify. Appeal,. Nothing in the Section shall be construed as granting any right of judicial review which does not previously existing in law. The decision of the Hearing Examiner shall be final and exclusive unless a writ of review if sought in the Superior Court of King County by an aggrieved party or person within 'fourteen (14) calendar days on the effective date of the Hearing Examiner's decision. The filing of a writ of review with the Superior Court shall not stay enforcement of the Heating Examiner's decision except by order of the Superior Court and on posting of a bond to be determined by the Court naming the City as beneficiary. Limitations of Authority. The Hearing Examiner shall have no authority relatiVe to interpretation of the administrative provisions of City codes or the technical codes nor shall the Hearing Examiner be emPowered to determine the validity or constitutionality of any Auburn ordinances, City codes adopted therein or standards, regulations and procedures adopted pursuant therelo or the terms 'and conditions of any permit or approval issued pursuant thereto or to waive requirements of Auburn ordinances, codes adopted therein, or standards, regulations and procedures adopted pursuant thereto or the terms and conditions of any permit or approval issued pursuant to the Auburn City Code, codes adopted therein and standards, regulations and procedures adopted pursuant thereto. REF. H:WORMSWB064 (7/25/91) 4 Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee (E~dorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Postage & Fees 2 ..10 2,;10 i. 50 1 Postmark Here Clerk: KV3,R3 LSentTo · ViOO 2-019 i I VICTOR J GOLKA ' PW-TMD I ~;;ZJ,'~'~;:'~'~:[ ........ " .................................................................. I orPOBoxNo. P O BOX 3806 J ~/~'~'~;;;~; ~;/;;'~'"'" ..................................................................... I KENT WA 98032 ~ ;,] ~ ,iu~t:l*l,;iq~4 !t, m ,,e,~,l,i ..~ ~ ~,z~ ,.-~=a ,~ra m~ r~ll i.i iF , dflll'll[iillli -~ ...... : .................................................... 3. Also COUplete ii item 4. if RestriCted Delivery is desired. 1 · Print your ·name and address on the mveme '· so that we can return the card to you. Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, tor on the front if space permits. 1. Artick~ Addressed to: Vio02-~0191 VICTOR J GOLKA 2800 S 224; ST DES MOINES WA 98198-5'199 B. Date of Delivery D. Is der~very address different from item 17 [] Yes ,YES, enter deli~T~ ,lol [] NO 3. Sen/ice Type ~[~7,ertified Mail [] F. xpmss Mail [] Registered [] Return Receipt for Merchandise [] Insured M~il [] C.O.D. 4. Restricted D~ivery? ~AtYa Fee) [] yes 2. Numbe~ PS Form 3811, July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-00-M-0952 CITY OF AUBURN AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE STATE OF WASHINGTON) COUNTY OF KING ) T. Michael Dunbar, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: 1. That I am a designee of the Code Enforcemem Official for the City of AubUrn; 2. That I am a citizen of the United States of America and over the age of 21 Years; 3. That I am competent to be a witness; 4. That I did serve Notice of Hearing to: Golka, Victor J. at: P.O. Box 3806, Kent, WA 98032 & 2800 S. 224th St., Des Moines, WA 98198-5199, at 4:00 PM. by means of: [ ] HAND DELIVERY [X] CERTIFIED MAIL [X] POSTED AT SITE on this 30th day of May 30, 2002 (Signature) SUBSCRIBE~D AND SWORN to before me this .t~/~ day of I [ o --.-.. ~ [ ~_ NOTARY PUBLIC iff'and forJ~hefitate of '{. _',, /~JOLIC 7 '$ Washington, residing at F4~f-~,,..-'L, MY COMMISSION expires: , · REF. VIO02-0191 (Notice of Hearing) " CITY OF AUBURN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION OF BUILDING AND LAND USE CODES ENFORCEMENT NOTICE OF FAILURE TO CORRECT VIOLATION Case No. VIO02-0191 The City of Auburn Codes Compliance Officer' notified you on May 6, 2002, that the below-described location was maintained or used in .violation of codes, ordinances, standards, regulations, procedures or permits of the City of Auburn. You were requested to correct all violatiOns by Friday~ May 10, 2002. A reinspection or review on May 16~2002, revealed that you have failed to comply with this request. Location of Violation: 4 Pike St. SE,.Aubum, wA 98002 Issued to: Golka, Victor J. Address of Person Notice is Issued to: P.O. Box 3806, Kent, WA' 98032 / 2800 S. 224th St., Des Moines, WA 98198-5199. Code, Ordinance,Standard, Regulation, ProcedUre or Pennit Violated: Auburn City Code (ACC) Title 8, Chapter 8.20, Section 8.20.010. Description of Violation: Yard'is overgrown with grass, weeds and dandelions. Corrective Action Required: The yard must be mowed and the weeds must be controlled. Yard must be put on a regular maintenance program to keep grass at or below legal permitted height qf six-inches. Corrective Action Must be Completed by: Monday, May 20th, 2002 at 8:00 AM. The person to whom this Notice is issued is being assessed $50.00 per day, or portion of a day, during which the violation continues after 8:00 AM, MaY 20'°~ 2002. The imposetl -monetary penalties are payable by cash, money order or cashier's check, to the City of Auburn Finance Department at Auburn City Hall, 25 West Main, Auburn, WA 98001- · 4998. ' If corrections are not completed as specified above, the monetarYpenalties shall continue to accrue and a hearing will be scheduled before the City of Auburn Hearing Examiner. The person to whom this notice is issued is responsible for notifYing the Codes compliance Officer (253-804-5094) when the corrections have been accomplished, in order for a verification inspection to be conducted. Method and Date of Service: Mailed May 16, 2002 Served: Posted May 16, 2002 Issuing Party: T. Michael Dunbar Title: Codes Compliance Officer Cc: JeffWeir, Building and Admin. Services Manager KEF. VIO02-0191 (Notice of Failure to Correct Violation) CITY OF AUBURN AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE STATE OF WASHINGTON) )SS. COUNTY OF KING ) T. Michael Dunbar, being first duly swom on oath, deposes and says: 1. That I am a designee, of the Code Enforcement Official for the City of Auburn; 2. That I am a citizen of the United States of America and over the age of 21 'years; 3. That I am competent to be a wimess; 4. That I did serve Notice of Failure to Correct Violation to: Golka, Victor J. at: P.O. Box 3806, Kentl WA 98032 / 2800 S. 224th St.,'Des Moines, WA 98198-5199, at 4:00 PM. by means of: [ ] HAND DELIVERY [X] CERTIFmD MAIL [X] POSTED AT SITE on this i6th day of May, 2002. REF: VIO02-O191 (Affidavit-2) Peetage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee ~ndorsemer~t Required) I~tficted Delivery Fee naomemeet Required) total Postage & Fees 2.1o_____, _ 1.50 ,.t To ViOQ2-oigi |. .' ...... ~et, Apt. No.; .......................................................... POS°xNe' 2800 S 224 ST ~Total PoS~ge & Fees .m f Se.t ro V~LOU2-UI~± I item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · Print your name and address on the reverse so that-we can return the card to you. · Attach {hi~ card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: VIO02-0.19t VICTOR J GOLKA. 2800 $ 224. ST DES MOINES WA 2. Article Numbei 98198 .51'99 ' ' X [] Agent D. Is delivery address differe~from item l? [] Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: I-I No 3. Service Type ~t~'~Certifled Mail [] Express Mail [] Registered [] Retum Receipt for Memhandise [] Insured Mail [] C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery? {Extra Fee) [] yes 7001 0360 0004 3050 3048 :, ~ i ."i ~i ~ D?~ Return Receipt 3811, Julyil~,.i9~., - ~i i 102595-OO-M-0952 CITY OF AUBURN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS DMSION'OF BUILDING AND LAND USE CODES ENFORCE1M~.NT NOTICE TO CORRECT VIOLATION Case No. VIO02-0191 Location of Violation: 4 Pike St. SE, Auburn, WA 98002 · Parcel Number: 118750-0010 Issued to: Golka, Victor J. Address of Person Notice is Issued to: P.O. Box 3806, Kent, WA 98032 / 2800 S. 224th St., Des Moines, WA 98198-5199 Code, Ordinance, Standard, Regulation, Procedure or Permit Violated: Aubum City Code (ACC) Title' 8, Chapter 8.20, Section 8.20.010. Description of Violation: Yard is overgrown with grass, weeds and dandelions. Corrective Action Required: The Yard must be mowed and the weeds must be controlled. Yard must be put on a weekly maintenance program to prevent further legal action by the City of Auburn. Corrective Action must be Completed by: Friday, May 10, 2002 at 8:00 A.M. A Request for Reconsideration of this case may be submitted in writing to the Building and Admin. Services Manager, 25 W. Main, Auburn, WA 98001-4998, by or before May 10, 2002, 8:00 A.M. If corrections are not completed as specified above, a NOTICE OF FAILURE TO CORRECT VIOLATION will be issued and a $50.00 per day fine will be applied for every day that the Violation continues. The Codes Compliance Officer must be notified (253-804-5094) when corrections have been accomplished, so a verification inspection can be scheduled'. Method and Date of Service: Mailed May 6, 2002 Served Posted May 6, 2002 Issuing Party: T. Michael Dunbar Title: Codes Compliance Officer Signature: cc: Jeff Weir, Building and Admin. Services Manager REF. VIO02-0191 (NoOce to Correct Violation) CITY OF AUBURN AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE STATE OF WASHINGTON) )SS. COUNTY OF KING ) T. Michael Dunbar, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says: That I am a designee of the Code Enforcement Official for the City °fAubum; That I am a citizen of the United States of America and over the age of 21 Years; That I am competent to be a witness; That I did serve Notice to CorreCt Violation 'to: Golka, Victor J. on this 6th at: P. O. Box 3806, Kent, WA 98032 & 2800 S. 224 St., Des Moines,.WA 98032-0306 , at 10:00A.M. by means of: [ ] mu, a) r)ELIVER¥ IX] CERTWmr) MAre [X] pOSTEr) AT srrE __ day of.May ,2002.___:. (Sigh~ti/re) SUBSCRIB_E~D~,~, SWORN to before me this 6th day of May, 2002. t. '."~ "7-ZZ'r ~ ~. /c~°~ ~ ~. ; ~ .... mi ~ NOT~Y P~HC ~ ~d for ~e State of ~. ~% .~. /~ f W~n~on, residing at ~~., *~[2ff~5~~~__~ ' ~ CO~SSION expires: ///a~/pa/ REF.VIO02-0191 (Affidavit-l) OFFIC[A Postage Certified Fee Return Receipt Fee ndomement Required] estricted Delivery Fee ndomement Required) 'oral P~'tage & Fees 2.10 1.50 ~nt To VI002-0191 .I...C..T..O...R.....G..O..L....K~.. .... PW-TMD ~et, Apt. No.; ............................... ~ .............................. .......................... ................. -' Certified Fee ~ Return Receipt Fee r~ (Endorsement Required) ~e 1::3 R_ .es:tricteq Derrvery Fee {::3 (Enaorsement Required) / ~ Total Postage & Fees I1'1 ISentTo 'v'70~2-01~1 · ]Street, .4pt. lvej ............................................... ~ ............. -=-'--~-. ...... .J l ll~[OI'~I~O~OxNO' ~) 0 BO'~ 3806 I :::: lr~4%;~7~/:';'i' ........................................................................ -I and 3. Also complete item 41E Restrict~=~ :Delivery is desired. · Print your na~e and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this. card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front' if Space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: VZO02-0191 A. ReCeived I 1-1 Agent r'l Add, uusee from item 17 I-lYes' If YES, enta- delivery address below: [] No VICTOR GOLKA 2800 S 224 ST DES MOZNES WA 98032 0306 ~ype I ]~ Certified Mail [] Ex~,s Mail I ~ .Registe. red rl~ Retum Receipt for Merchandise · LJ insured Mail [] C.O.D. · i PS Form ~1 1, July 119~ Domestic Flelum Fleo~iil 102595-00-M-0952 Mike Dunbar FrOm: 'Sent: To: Subject: Mike Dunbar Monday, May 06, 2002 8:39 AM 'Andrea Meld' RE: ~4 'Pike St SE · Mr. Golka has been served with Notice to Correct Violation, per the City Code. I can only hope he.responds faster than he has in the past. - Mike Dunbar ..... Original Message ..... From: Andrea Meld [mailt0:palmatum@earthlink.net] ~ Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 9:36 PM To: Mike Dunbar Subject: Re: #4 Pike St SE Mr Dunbar: The grounds at #4 Pike ST SE are literally-a dandelion factory, which I ~m sure our neighbors as well as ourselves do not appreciate. In addition, we have seen broken glass and other debris on the.sidewalk, which poses a Hazard to the postal carriers and others. Any actions pending? Thanks for your attention to this problem. Sincerely, Andrea Meld 18 Pike ST SE ..... Original Message ..... From: Mike Dunbar <mdunbar@ci.auburn.wa.us> To: 'meld et ferrarini' <palmatum@earthlink.net> Date: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 8:44 AM Subject: RE: #4 Pike St SE >Mr. Ferrarini, > >Based on his past history I'm not going to hold my breath, but Victor Golka >did finally return my last call and has promised to have the house secured >by the end of the week.. He claims to have hired a contractor to start the >renovation of the house as soon as the contractor finishes the job he is >currently working on. He claims to have done a walk through of the house >with the contractor this week, and he provided me with the.name of the >contractor. He said he plans to redo the interior of the house first, then >the windows, and last, put on a new roof, unless he finds that the roof is >leaking, in which case he will do it first. He seems sincere, but of course >he has failed to follow through before when I thought he was sincere. His >new promises, have not changed our plans to'proceed with the abatement of the >property. He has been told that the only way to prevent the abatement is to >follow through with the remodel and rental of the house before the abatement >process is complete. Our new City Attorne.yis presently'working with >several of our staff, including me, to revise some existing ordinances, >write some new ones, and also adopt some useful State Laws that will allow Mike Dunbar From: Sent: To: Subject: Andrea Meld [palmatum@earthlink.net] Sunday, May05, 2002 9:36 PM Mike Dunbar Re: #4 Pike St SE Mr. Dunbar: The grounds at #4 Pike ST SE are literally a dandelion factory, which I am sure our neighbors as well as ourselves do not appreciate. In addition, we have seen broken glass and other debris on the sidewalk, which poses a · Hazard to the postal carriers and others. Any actions pending? Thanks for your attention to this problem. Sincerely, Andrea Meld 18 Pike ST SE 'Original Message ..... From: Mike Dunbar <mdunbar@ci.auburn.wa.us> To: 'meld et ferrarini' <palmatum@earthlink.net> Date: Wednesday, FebrUary 06, 2002 8:44 AM Subject: RE: #4 Pike St SE >Mr. Ferrarini, > >Based on his past history I'm not going to hold my breath, but Victor Golka >did finally return my last call ahd has promised to have the house secured >by the end of the week. He claims to have hired a contractor to start the >renovation of the house as soon as the contractor finishes the job he is >currently ~orking on. He claims to have done a walk through of the house >with the contractor this.week, and he provided me with the name of the >contractor. He said he plans to redo the interior of the house first, then >the windows, and last, put on a new roof, unless-he finds that the roof is >leaking, in which case he will do it first. He. seems sincere, but of course >he has failed to follow through before when I thought he was sincere. His >new promises have not changed our plans to proceed with the abatement of the >property. He has been told that the only-way to prevent the abatement is to >follow through with the remodel and rental of the house before the abatement >process is complete. Our new City Attorney is presently working with >several of our staff~ including me, to revise some existing ordinances, >write some new ones, and also adopt some useful State Laws that will allow >us to deal more effectively with this type of problem. I can't give you a >date that the changes will be in effect, but the new Mayor is supporting the >changes and has made it a priority for the staff. For now, all we. can d° is >work with the existing laws, which as you are painfully aware have been less · >than effective. To answer your question, yes,. I am optimistic because I >think Mr. Golka finally understands that he will lose his house unless he >follows through this time. > >Mike Dunbar > >--T--Original Message ..... >From: meld et ferrarini [mailto:palmatum@earthlink.net] "~ >Sent: Sunday, February 03, 2002 11:45 AM >To: Mike Dunbar >Subject: Re: #4 Pike St SE > > >Hello Mike, > >Six months have passed since our last exchange of messages. The house at 4 >Pike >SE remains unsecured. A few weeks ago, someone smashed the side window >facing >Main St. Yesterday I noticed that the very large plate glass window facing >Pike >ST has also been smashed. At the very least, this house needs to be boarded >up >immediately. > >Are you still optimistic about Mr Golka's promises? >What about the "incentive" you mentioned last July? > >Marco Ferrarini and Andrea Meld > >Mike Dunbar wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I just checked my weekend phone messages and had .one from the property >> owner, Mr. Golka. He said he had hired a landscaper to do the yard on >> Sunday, 7-22-01, and that he had just called and said he had failed to.. >> fininsh another job and would not be able to do 4 Pike SE until Monday or >> Tuesday. Mr. Golka also said he would have someone there on Monday or >> Tuesday to secure the house and to install a new metal front door. >Hopefully >> he will follow through. The paperwork I delivered to his office last week >> should give him some incentive. >> >> Mike Dunbar >> >> ..... Original Message ..... >> From: meld et ferrarini [mailto:palmatum@earthlink.net] >> Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 11:37 AM >> To: Mike Dunbar >> Subject: Re: #4 Pike St SE >> >> Dear Mr. Dunbar: >> >> Thanks for sending us your reply. We appreciate your taking on this >> situation. >> It does sound like you are doing everything possible within the legal >> framework. >> >> Do you have any estimate of when this situation might be resolved, that >is, >> the >> house and yard are no longer a public health and safety hazard? We are >most >> concerned about young children in the neighborhood. Earlier.this year, >the >>.Auburn police had to 'escort a homeless man who intended to camp out there. >> In >> additon, our cats and our neighbors' cats and dogs wander through the yard ~. >> and >> house at #4 Pike, and mi~ possibly come to some harm. y, the l>> unsightly >> and unsanitary condition of this property throws a negative light on the >> entire >> block, and decreases the property value and enjoyment of our homes and >> gardens, >> which we all work hard to maintain (not to mention pay taxes for). >> >> If it would be helpful in expediting this process, we are willing to >testify >> or >> sign a petition or other legal document. >> >> Again, please let us know if we can be of help. >> >> Thank you. >> >> Andrea Meld and Marco Ferrarini >> #18 Pike ST SE >> Auburn, WA >> >> Mike Dunbar wrote: >> >> > Mr. Ferrarini, >> > >> > I know you. would not suspect it from the appearance of the property at >> > Pike St. SE, but this house is my number one code compliance priority. I >> > thought we had the problem resolved when I located the owner and got him >> > started on the cleanup, but as you so elequently pointed out, the >problem >> > has only gotten worse. The last communication I received from the >property >> > owner was on Monday, July 13, 2001 when he left me a voice mail advising >> > that he was in the process of getting bids for the new roof and interior >> > repairs. Unfortunately, he called at 4:30 AM so I Was not here to >receive >> > his call, and he has failed to return the twenty calls I have made to >his >> > office since then in an effort to discuss the condition of the yard. He >is >> > being served with additional papers today that I will be hand delivering >> to >> > him at his office, along with current photographs of the property. I >have >> > spoken several times with the contractor he hired to do the cleanup and >> was >> > told that there was a dispute over the financial aspects. The contractor >> has >> > apparently had as much trouble as I have in getting the property owner >to >> > return his calls and won't continue until the monetary issues are >> resolved. >> > I won't ask you to be patient, I know it has gone way beyond that. I' >just >>~> wanted to let.you know that I am doing everything legally possible to >> > resolve the situation. My direct phone line is 253-804-5094, should~you >> ever >> > want to discuss the situation with me. The best time to catch me in the >> > office normally, is in the morning between 8:00 and 10:00. >> > >> > Mike Dunbar >> > >> >'- .... Original Message ..... >> > From: meld et ferrarini [m'aitto:palmatum@earthlink.net] >> > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 10:44 PM >> > To: mdunbar@ci.auburn.wa.us >> > Subject: #4 Pike St SE >> > >> > Things seem to be going from bad to worse at ~4 Pike ST SE. Before the >> > recent abortive attempt to clean up the place, it was at least somewhat >> > secure, and the worst that could be said of the grounds would be to call '>> > it a weed farm. Now the place is completely unsecured, anyone can enter >> > the premises at any time( I often find the doors ajar), the grounds are >> > littered with broken appliances'and various pieces of junk, a huge >> > dumpster half full of rotting garbage leaks fluids into the street and >> > also serves as a convenient drop off for the refuse of passersby as >> > well as attracting scavengers. I'm surprised that most of the glass in >> > the house is still intact and the place survived the July 4th >> > bombastics. 'Must be because we.are'a basically a very nice neighborhood. >> > This place is unsightly and dangerous, what's it going to take to'get >> > some effective action on a permanent clean up - a serious incident? I >> > live next door and we as well as .everybody else on the block are fed up >> > with having this blight in our midst. What can we do to support and >> > expedite some serious action to remove this nuisance? >> > >> > Marco Ferrarini - 18 Pike ST SE Mike-Dunbar From: Sent: To: Subject: Mike Dunbar Tuesday, May 28, 2002 11:34 AM Paul Krauss RE: 4 Pike St. SE Yes & OK. Mike ----Original Message .... From: Paul Krauss Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 20:56 AM To: Mike Dunbar Cc: Lynn Rued Subject: RE: 4 Pike St. SE so to date, nothing visible has been accomplished and we only have his word on ordering materials? schedule a hearing and if he performs, we can continue or cancel it I agree, ---Original Message---- From: Mike Dunbar. Sent:. -Tuesday, May 28, 2002 10:31 AM To: Paul Krauss Cc: Lynn Rued Subject: FW: 4 Pike St. SE Paul, I am forwarding my response to the Mayor's inquiry about this property. Subsequent to this letter, I received a voice mail from Mr. Golka advising that he had ordered new windows and a new front door for the house. He said the roof will be next, and then the interior. I will check the yard again today and if he has not cut it, rll talk to Patti about scheduling a hearing. He is already a few days late in complying with a failure to comply notice for the grass. ~ Mike ----Original Message From: Mike Dunbar Sent: Thursday, May 23; 2002 8:36 AH To: Pete Lewis Subject:. 4 Pike St. SE Mayor Lewis, It is true that this property has been a problem for several years and I understand the frustration of the neighbors. Mr. and Mrs. Clarke are not the only neighbors I have heard from. When I started in this job, I was told the house had been vacant for two Years. A City crew had boarded up the house When they Were unable to locate the owner. Tony Baca had sent the letter that Mr. Clarke referred to requesting that the owner, Victor Golka repair the building to a usable condition or demolish it within sixty days. That letter was just a request. As I understand the law, we can require the demolition of a.building only if is determined to be a "dangerous building." Once the house was secured, it was no longer a "dangerous building.'' There is a State RCW regarding "Blighted Properties" that may have allowed us to abate the property, but the City had not adopted the RCW by ordinance. I believe Christine Fngler is working to have that done. " Tony Baca sent the file to the City Attorney's office in an attempt to abate the building, but it was retumed without further action. Mayor Booth told me that the Building, Police, and Legal Departments had all been unable to locate Mr. Golka, which had led to the use of a City crew to secure the property after transients had broken into it. Mayor Booth asked me to find Victor Golka and make the problem go away. I located Mr. Golka at his place of employment in Des Moines. He hired a crew to begin work on the house. They' removed most of the plywood installed by the City crew, brought in a large dumpster and removed tons of garbage from inside the house which, had apparently been brought in by transients before the City boarded up the house. I met with Mr. Golka a couple 1 of times to discuss what nee be dOne and also had Veronica R'enterl~he Building Inspector for that area, advise Mr. Golka what repairs would be required before he could put the house up for rent. Mr. Golka told me that the house had deteriorated because he had been recovering from a serious illness for the prior two years, but that he was going to renovate it and put it up for rent. I was told by his receptionist that he had suffered a stroke. After the interior of the house had been cleaned out, Mr. Golka had an apparent disagreement with the crew. He told me they had failed to do what he hired them to do. They told me he failed to pay them. The end result was that the work stopped. After more notices from me, Mr. Golka hired someone to complete the yard work. The house was then secured and the grass was mowed, so there was no violation. At some point the house became accessible again. I received complaints from neighbors stating it was open and that they h~d been inside. I again used the legal process available to me to get Mr. Golka to secure the house. He hired another crew to board up the house, again bringing the property into compliance with the Law. He told me that he was going to rent out the house after it was repaired, but that lack of money was stopping him from proceeding faster. The building is structurally sound at present, and although it is certainly an eyesore, it is in compliance with the law, with the exception of the tall grass. As soon as I observed the grass to be in violation again this spdng, I posted the property and sent notices to Mr. Golka directing him to cut the grass. Consistent with his prior history, he ignOred the first notice. I then posted the house with a Failure to Comply notice and mailed copies to him. As of today, Mr. Golka is three days late in meeting the deadline I gave him for mowing the grass. I gave him very little time to comply, in anticipation of being ignored anyway, so that I could proceed to the public headng sooner and keep the . neighbors from attacking you. When I arrived at work this morning I had a voice mail from Mr. Golka advising that he is going to take care of the lawn and that he will call me today to discuss the contractor he has hired to work on the house.. The next step in our process is for me to schedule the public hearing with the City's hearing examiner. Per City Code, that must be done before any fines can be levied. With our present system, once a violation is corrected the pOssibility of fines goes away. Each new violation starts the same lengthy process over again. That, and the fact that the former administration was reluctant to spend the money for a hearing examiner for minor violations, I believe, are the primary reasons that to date, no fines' have been collected .from Mr. Golka. As you are aware, Dan Heid is W°rking on changes in our enforcement process which will eliminate the requirement for the public hearing in this type of case, and allow Us to deal more effectively with this kind of problem. As soon as Mr. Golka mows his lawn again he will be in full compliance, with the law. Based on his voicemail today, I suspect the grass will be mowed before a hearing can be scheduled. His neighbors will be just as unhappy with the · appearance of the hOuse, but there is nothing we can do beyond requiring him to mow the grass as long as the. house remains secured and structurally sound. I will keep the pressure on Mr. Golka to follow through with his promise to repair the house but we don't currently have the means to force the issue. Mike Mike-Dunbar From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Pete Lewis Thursday, May 23, 2002 10:28 AM Fred Poe; Gene Cerino; Jeanne Barber; Rich,Wagner; Rich Wagner -Altemate; Stacey Brothers; Susan Singer; Susan Singer - Alternate; Trish Borden . Dan Heid; Paul Krauss 4 Pike St This house has been a situation for a number of years. At One point in time the city had gone in and boarded up the house since they could not locate the owner. The owner was located and hired a crew to. clean up and clean out th~ house. Apparently over. a ton of garbagewas taken out of the structure that had been used by transients before the city boarded it up. Owner had stated he had been ill which had prevented him.from cleaning up home. Owner then got into a dispute with his clean up crew which did not get paid or complete the work. Home is boarded up. From Point of view of code enforcement, under current ordinances, home is secure but city has issued notice as height of grass is a violation. Owner says he has new crew coming to clean up house again..Code enforcement is in process of asking for a hearing before headng examiner because our current ordinance requires that before any fine can be levied. If owner then mows yard before hearing examiner date takes place then process starts all over again. Code enforcement will do their job under the ordinances they have available to them now. City Attorney will be bringing forth corrections to current ordinances to Council to discuss. City Council will take action to correct ordinances to deal with today's situations. P 'Mike'Dunbar From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Duanna Richards Thursday, May 23, 2002 9:24 AM 'Trish Borden' Mike Dunbar; Pete Lewis RE: Letter re: 4 Pike Street SE Trish, I'm forwarding Your question to our Code EnfOrcement Officer, Mike Dunbar, whO is. already working on this situation. He will report back to the Mayor, who will then pass the information on to Council. Duanna ..... Original Message ...... From: Trish Borden [mailt.o:trish@trillium-services.org] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 8:31 AM To: Duanna Richards Subject: RE: Letter re: 4 Pike Street SE Duanna *' What is code enforcement doing to consequate this apparent violation of codes? Trish ..... Original Me~sage ..... From: Duanna Richards [maiito:drichards@ci.auburn.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, MAY.22, 2002 5:32 PM To: Pete Lewis; Fred Poe; Gene Cerino; Jeanne Barber; Rich Wagner; Rich Wagner - Alternate; Stacey Brothers; Susan Singer; Susan Singer - Alternate; Trish Borden Cc: Christine Engler Subject: Letter re: 4 Pike Street SE ! am forwarding this e-mail that was I re6eived yesterday from one of our citizens. Duanna <<4Pikeltr.txt>> Mike Dunbar From: Sent: To: Cc:. SubJect: Pete Lewis Wednesday, May 22, 2002 4:35 PM Dan Heid Mike Dunbar FW: resent message re 4 Pike SE Unk~wnDocument O.K., if I have read this information correctly plus what I have heard in the past from our staff and the neighbors we have a situation with an owner that does things only after much effort and coaxing. We've done the right thing. Now the owner must do so. Pleasemeet and discusss this and then meet with me to discuss alternatives and be ready to have a start date for future action that will not stop unless permanent solutions are completed. P ..... Original Message ..... From: Katherine Clarke [mailto:ckclarke@earthlink.net} Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2002 6:30 PM To: Pete Lewis; Rich Wagner; Sue Singer; Fred Poe; Stacey Brothers; Gene Cerino; Bill Clarke; meld et ferrarini Subject: resent message re 4 Pike SE Have now sent this in Word 4.0 and will copy to this email. The Clarkes May 21, 2002 To Mayor Lewis and the City Council, Thank you for providing information relating to 4 Pike Street SE in response to the public records request submitted by Mentor Law Group. After reviewing the information, we now have a number of questions about the future of 4 Pike St. SE and its impacts on Pike Street residents. 4 Pike Street SE has been vacant for at least 3 years and continues to be a blight and eyesore for those of us who live in the area.' The city has been aware of this problem for at least three years and it seems that little or nothinghas really' been done~ Here are several question I have from the 100+ pages we received from the city on 4 Pike Street SE: 1.Has Mr. 'Golka ever been fined for having his lawn/weeds over the legal limit? 2.Has a lien ever been placed against his property? 3.Does the city have some sort of "game plan" in dealing with this Property? What is most disturbing is that there are at least eight different times the city has contacted Mr. Golka to do something about the property with the threat of fines or liens to the property. Between February 1, 1999 and May 11, 1999,' the city of Auburn sent Mr. Golka 4 or 5 letters or NOTICE OF HEARING letters. In these letters were threats to plaCe a lien on the property and mention of Auburn's city code which fines an individual $50 per day. An example of this is a NOTICE OE FAILURE TO. CORRECT VIOLATION [Case no. VIO0033-99] which stated that "The person to whom this Notice is issued is'being assessed $50.00 per day or portion of a day.." Yet we see no record Of Mr. Golka ever paying a fine. In the year 2000~ there are few records the city has on 4 ~ike St'. SE. One letter of June 30, 2000 is worth quoting, as it confirms there is a pattern the city seems to have established in pleading with Mr. Golka, but seeming to not really do much about it. The next paragraph is the first paragraPh of this June 30th,. 2000 letter. "This letter is intended as a request for your cooperation in cutting the tall Weeds and grass on the front yard of your property located of 4 Pike Street SE, Auburn, WA. Mr G°lka we have made numerous attempts in the past to contact you, if you did not arrange'to cut these weeds and ~ grass we will have it done and place an additional lean [sic] on the property." Does this mean, as the last few words imply, that there is a lien on the property? If so, how many liens are on the property? On Feb. 21, 2001, Mr. Antonio Baca wrote a letter to Mr. Golka. The second paragraph of this letter states: "As the Building Official of the City of Auburn, I must request that you repair the buildings to a usable condition or demolish the buildings entirely with 60 days of .this notice. If you decide to initiate repairs please secure the appropriate permits for the 'required repairs.~ If your decision is to demolish " Fifteen months, later, the building is still not usable. Five months later, Mike' Dunbar wrote to Mr. Golka. The first paragraph stated: "I am writing this letter in a last desperate attempt to get some kind of response from you before proceeding with legal steps to abate your property at 4 Pike Street SE in Auburn, under RCW 35.80.010 Condemnation of blighted property. ." On October 8, (YEAR??) a NOTICE TO CORRECT.VIOLATIONS was posted and sent to Mr. Golka for the violation of "failure to maintain yard to code." So here we are in the spring of 2002 and really nothing has'changed. There are two notices posted on Mr. Golka's property with the usual $50 fine per day for not cutting the grass and weeds. The residents of Pike Street are "fined" every'time we drive by this yard.As numerous residents of Pike Street have noted in their .letters to the City, the condition of 4 Pike Street degrades our quality of life, lessens our ~ property values, and at times is dangerous' on a street with numerous young children. Continued inaction by the city conveys the message to the owners of 4 Pike Street SE that nothing will ever be done, and conveys the message to Pike Street residents that no one at the city really cares~It is often said that ~justice delayed is justice denied,'f and this is becoming one of those times. The residents of Pike Street believe that it is time for the delay to end and for action to begin. Please let us know how the City intends to deal With this situation. The residents of Pike Street would gladly host a meeting for city officials to explain the situation and help establish a course of action to resolve this situation. sincerely, % Charlie and Kathy Clarke