Unintended consequences...

[sheclown]

Perhaps when Ordinance 2007-286-E was passed, city council thought they were equipping code enforcement to save the community.  To quote:

The accumulation of underbrush, weeds, rubbish, trash and grass as well as the creation of pools, ponds or other bodies of water or structures which endangers the public health, welfare or safety of the community, has become an ever increasing menace, constitutes a nuisance, and the city acting through the Chief shall have the authority to, and shall, as a priority, abate the same in the most aggressive means provided by the Ordinance Code or state law.  The abatement of such nuisance enhances the value of the property, involves furnishing of vital services and constitutes a special assessment.

Unfortunately, the ordinance forced code enforcement to go after public nuisances in an aggressive manner.  In Springfield, this is in the form of demolitions.

For a full copy of the Ordinance

http://citycirc.coj.net/coj/2007/Council/90-MARCH-13-2007.htm

(found near the bottom of the page)

[sheclown]

 

Bill Type and Number: Ordinance 2007 - 286

Sponsor: Council Member Davis

Date of Introduction: March 13, 2007

Committee(s) of Reference: F, TEUS, A

Date of Analysis: March 16, 2007

Type of Action: Amends various sections of Chapter 518, Ordinance Code

Bill Summary: The bill makes a number of changes in Part 2 of Chapter 518 (Property Safety & Maintenance Code) of the City’s Ordinance Code.  Major changes are:

    * Upgrades the violation from a Class C to a Class E, a new class, and makes the offense a separate offense each day, rather than one per every 15-day period.
    * Changes from 15 days to 10 days the period to refer matter to a Board or Special Master.
    * If Board or Special Master orders correction, the City will immediately move to clean up the property in violation.  Currently, the City has option to do so or refer the case to the Municipal Code Enforcement Board.
    * Adds to the City’s possible collection costs such specific costs as attorneys, court fees and collection agency fees.
    * Collected funds are to be deposited into a new Nuisance Abatement Lien Special Revenue Fund.
    * Creates a new class of offenses, Class E with a fine of $350 and a cost of $5, a total of $355.
    * Establishes a Nuisance Abatement Lien Special Revenue Fund as a permanent Housing & Neighborhoods Department fund.  Fund use is limited to paying for the abatement of nuisances.

Policy Impact Area: Nuisance Abatement Liens

Fiscal Impact: Undetermined, but the impact of the changes should result in an increased flow of fine payments, both in numbers of payments and in the dollar value of the payment.   

Analyst: Weiss

http://citycirc.coj.net/coj/Summary/2007-0286.htm

[sheclown]

Public Health & Safety Committee
Matters relating to the Jacksonville Children's Commission; child services; public safety; motor vehicle inspections; collections; crime victim services; Sheriff's Office; Fire and Rescue Department; emergency preparedness and civil defenses; hospitals; Health Department; human services; welfare; health; and all related subjects.

Committee Members:
Ronnie Fussell - Chair
Daniel Davis - Vice Chair
Reggie Brown
Johnny Gaffney
Ray Holt
Glorious Johnson
Art Shad

[sheclown]

Public safety is a worthy goal for any city.  Problem is that when you are in a Nationally Recognized Historic District, you must be willing to live with a less stringent interpretation of "public safety" than if you are living in a standard neighborhood.

Homes, probably boarded, "mothballed", according to National Park Service standards, ought to be exempt from meeting the "public safety" standard and spared from the "most aggressive means" approach to public safety.

If we don't choose to see and evaluate our historic structures differently, we will lose all our historic structures -- ones unlucky enough to be awaiting restoration -- for the fear of being a "public safety" nuisance.

[sheclown]

The city could do this. It could make exceptions and allowances for historic buildings.

It already does this, in essence, with building codes.  There is a section in the building codes which addresses historic structures.  Historic homes do not have to meet the same requirements as non-historic structures in areas like porch railing height, insulation, treads and risers, all manner of exceptions and allowances to retain the historic nature of the buildings.

Surely, there could be exceptions and allowances made for historic homes from a public nuisance view as well.

Especially if tied to a stabilization practice as accepted as "mothballing".

[uptowngirl]

What si the public saftey impact of untended vacant lots? First they become dumping grounds for items such as couches, construction items (old lead paint covered wood, paint stippers, asestos siding and shingles, electrical wiring), tires, batteries, paint cans,and shopping carts, then the weeds and grass grow knee or thigh high. They are infested with rats, mice, roaches, and become a breeding ground for mosquitos. Not to mention the mental impact and feeling of hopelessness and abandonment.  Demolition actually adds further health and mental risks and opportunity for environmental crime.

[sheclown]

The abatement of such nuisance enhances the value of the property, involves furnishing of vital services and constitutes a special assessment.

Nuisance abatement
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Nuisance abatement is a growing area within policing and code enforcement. The term refers to using building codes, fire codes, zoning, etc. in order to improve the quality of life and resolve life safety issues within neighborhoods. Nuisance abatement programs are most often a component of problem oriented or community policing programs. In most Canadian jurisdictions, Bylaw enforcement officers handle nuisance abatement.

For a discussion on "quality of life" enforcement & community policing programs, go here:

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,6948.0.html