|
AGENDA INFORMATION SHEET
<br />PROJECT: Repeal of existing ordinance and enactment of new ordinance amending Chapter 7 of the Paris
<br />Code ofOrdinances consistent with State law regarding substandard buildings and structures and the abatement
<br />of that nuisance.
<br />BACKGROUND: In the city of Paris, as well as all other cities, there exist dilapidated buildings and other
<br />sh-uctures which, if left unaddressed, endangerthe safety and well-being ofcitizens and neighboring properties,
<br />bring down property values (and, consequently, tax revenues) in the area, invite criminal activity, and are, to
<br />say the least, eyesores. Since at least 1970, the City has had an ordinance to provide for the repair and/or
<br />removal of such structures, but the ordinance has not been updated to keep pace with current State law. There
<br />are significant differences between our present ordinance and current authorizing legislation, and any future
<br />demolition activity must be conducted pursuant to an ordinance that meets State law standards.
<br />DESCRIPTION: Two new Articles are proposed to be added to Chapter 7 of the City Code.
<br />(1) Article III ofthe attached proposed ordinance contains the requirements derived from State law regarding
<br />enforcementactions against substandard buildings and structures. In addition, the proposed ordinance replaces
<br />the administrative scheme of the existing ordinance with a building and standards commission as authorized
<br />by current State law. In the past, a committee of several City employees, including the building official and
<br />the city engineer, has held hearings, made determinations as to dilapidated structures, then sent a report to the
<br />City CounciL The City Council would then hold a second hearing and issue any orders regarding the repair
<br />or demolition of such structures. By contrast, a building and standards commission is made up of nine (9)
<br />members ofthe community, five (5) regular members and four (4) alternates, and their decisions are appealable
<br />only to a district court. Such a procedure insulates the City from the charge that it is making these decisions
<br />unilaterally, without concern to citizen input, since the decision makers will be a citizen board. It also insulates
<br />the Council from charges of political favoritism since the citizen commission, and not the Council, will be
<br />holding the hearings. Investigations will be conducted by the code inspectors, and the code inspectors will be
<br />non-voting ex-officio members of the commission. As before, the new ordinance provides that, should the
<br />owner fail to repair or demolish a structure as ordered, the City can demolish the structure, assess the cost to
<br />the owner, and place a lien on the property to secure payment.
<br />(2) Article IV of the proposed ordinance would implement a program for issuing permits for buildings placed
<br />in a secured status. The purpose ofthis article would be to provide property owners and the City an alternative
<br />way to regulate some of the substandard buildings in the City. Under these provisions, only buildings which
<br />are structurally sound (i.e., have solid walls, and non-leaking roof, and are in no significant danger of fire or
<br />collapse) would be eligible to be placed in a secured building status provided the owner complied with the
<br />requirements of the ordinance. Under the ordinance, the owner would seek a permit, pay a fee, the building
<br />would be inspected at the owner's expense by a state certified inspector, and if the building was found
<br />exteriorly sound, then the owner would be required to secure the building from access by vagrants or other
<br />individuals but would not be required to bring the internal structures up to City code. The building could not
<br />be occupied during the term of the permit; all windows and doors would be secured; and the building must be
<br />maintained in a structurally safe and sound condition for the permit to continue to be valid. In addition, the
<br />owner would have to allow access by authorized City personnel, including police officers, the fire marshal,
<br />and City inspectors, to make sure the building does not represent an additional safety risk. Providing this
<br />process affords building owners an alternative to making the expenditures necessary to bring internal portions
<br />of an otherwise sound building up to code until such time as a tenant is available for the building, or the owner
<br />has some other purpose for which the building can be utilized. Adoption ofthis Article IV is purely optional;
<br />it is an attempt by the Legal Department to provide the opportunity for certain otherwise sound buildings to
<br />avoid demolition as long as the owners maintain them in a status which does not represent an immediate risk
<br />
|