|
Linda
Baumeister/Review
The St. Paul Department of Safety and
Inspections has deemed the building at 1901 Maryland Ave. E to be unsafe. On
April 4, the St. Paul City Council unanimously voted to demolish the building.
Property owner Michael Ahrndt contests their reasoning and said he’s being
targeted. |
|
|
*photos by Linda Baumeister/Review.
**photos by Kaitlyn Egan/Review
Above middle**, the city
vacated a triangular slice of park property to accommodate Michael Ahrndt's
property. However, Ahrndt says the property line still comes within 6 inches of
his building, and his landscaping still sits on park land. Just above**, Michael
Ahrndt, who owns the 1901 Maryland Ave. E property, waited for his opportunity
to speak out against the demolition of his duplex at the April 4 city council
public hearing. |
|
Click
Here to view the "Revocation of Fire Certificate of Occupancy and Order to
Vacate" document with the list of building "deficiencies."
|
|
Kaitlyn Egan news editor
After a long
battle, East Side property owner Michael Ahrndt will have to face defeat.
The St. Paul City Council unanimously voted for the razing of the
residential structure at 1901 Maryland Ave. E. at its April 4
meeting.
It's safe to say the property at the intersection of Maryland
Avenue and Hazel Street is approaching notorious status, at least in the minds
of neighbors, community members and city officials who have come in contact with
it. The city classified the dwelling as a "nuisance structure," and neighbors
say it has had a rundown appearance for years.
"I don't contest that the
outside is in need of a complete renovation," said Ahrndt, who purchased the
property about 12 years ago.
He said he's completely remodeled the
interior but stopped short on the exterior since "it's quite obvious that
there's a desire to not have the house there."
Ahrndt now has 30 days to
demolish the duplex or the city will do the job and send him the
bill.
'Unsafe'
The City of St. Paul Department of Safety
and Inspections registered the building vacant on Oct. 17, even though Ahrndt
contended that he and a caretaker were still living in it.
However, the
building, which city officials said was being used illegally as a triplex,
wasn't registered vacant because it was empty. It was condemned by fire
inspectors and registered vacant because it was unsafe for anyone to live there,
said Robert Humphrey of the city's Safety and Inspections
department.
According to city documents, a fire inspector discovered 29
"deficiencies" when the building was registered vacant, including exposed wiring
and damaged electrical fixtures; a small 56-square-foot bedroom that was
declared too small for sleeping purposes; obstructed exists and rooms with no
windows; crumbling ceilings and walls; a permeable bathroom floor; a furnace
tucked in a small hallway closet; and stashes of propane being stored inside the
house.
Fixing many of these problems would require a building
permit.
Safety and Inspections sent a notice to Ahrndt at a Scandia
address listing the issues with the dwelling. The document also notified him the
property's certificate of occupancy was revoked and the building needed to be
vacated.
When Safety and Inspections checked on the duplex early in
September, there were no vacant and condemned placards posted and the inspector
noted there was a chance someone was still living in there, according to
inspection documents. When an inspector returned mid-month, there were still no
placards on the building, and people could be seen inside.
"Their claims
of their condition of the property are completely not true," Ahrndt said in a
recent interview. He said the dwelling has brand new ceilings, walls and floors
as well as a fully remodeled kitchen. The unsafe wiring is all in the third
unit, which was never used, and electricity to that part of the building was
shut off, said Ahrndt.
In fact, Ahrndt claimed one of the inspectors
wanted to rent the property from him, but then condemned the building two months
later.
'Neighbors felt abused'
Inspectors started focusing
on the property after receiving a citizen complaint last August, Humphrey said,
but he knows of neighborhood complaints stretching back to at least 2005, when
someone alerted the city about the appearance of the exterior of the
duplex.
"There's a long history to this property. There's been problems a
long way back," Humphrey said. "We've been working with (the property owner)
since then to try to do something with it."
The last building permit
issued for the structure was in 2009, but there have been at least eight
complaints about the dilapidated state of the building since then, Humphrey
said.
Complaints over the years have included reports of the home falling
into disrepair, unfinished roofing, crumbling siding, a broken garage door and
work being done without a permit.
"The neighbors felt abused. They felt
as though he had very little respect for them," said Sue McCall, District 2's
block club coordinator. "All the block clubs in that area said it ruined the
area. It's an area of nice homes, except for that one. It's just really, really
awful."
McCall has been working at the District 2 Community Council for
fours years, and the rundown state of 1901 Maryland Ave. E. was one of the very
first things she ever heard from neighbors.
"I had only been here for a
few days and I drove around with fellow council members and that was one of the
low points they treated me to," she said.
"For a long, long time he's had
orders to repair it," said community council executive director Chuck Repke. "It
just went on and on and on, and it looked like he was never going to get it
done."
The North East Neighborhoods Development Corporation was
interested in purchasing the property from Ahrndt when it became apparent he was
struggling to fix it up, Repke said, but Ahrndt decided he wanted to continue
with the repairs.
Property lines
Ahrndt believes the city's
main issue with the house is that the property and portions of the house cross
onto Furness Parkway green space, which is city parkland.
St. Paul Parks
and Recreation has been planning improvements for the swatch of grass stretching
from Maryland Avenue to Larpenteur Avenue, just west of McKnight Road, for
years. Now, residents with encroachments, including Ahrndt, have until the end
of May to remove them, or the city will.
In Ahrndt's case, the city did
vacate a triangular slice of the park property so the line no longer cuts
through parts of Ahrndt's building. However, Ahrndt says the property line still
comes within 6 inches of the building at its closest, and his flowerbed and
other landscaping still sits over the line on park land.
Ahrndt said he
first realized he had an issue 10 years ago when he got a parking ticket for
parking in what he thought was his own driveway. Apparently, what he thought was
his driveway was actually an easement on the adjacent parkland -- city-owned
property.
Ahrndt said he started to research the property and discovered
that his lot wasn't what he thought. In fact, long before Ahrndt purchased the
property, the home was built several feet over the property line onto park
land.
He contended that years of phone calls, letters and emails to the
city in an effort to learn more about the property issue and possible solutions
were in vain. Ahrndt asserted that no one responded or would cooperate with
him.
He halted renovations because of the uncertain future of the
property and the city's lack of communication, he added.
"Not knowing the
city's position, would any of you, would anybody continue to invest dollars?"
Ahrndt asked city council members at the recent public hearing on the potential
demolition. "I would like to request that we move back a step from the position
that you're about to take that will be extremely harmful to the community and
reputation of the council."
Ahrndt said the inspection reports contained
"gross inaccuracies," and he didn't want his duplex to be demolished because of
false information.
The future
Despite Ahrndt's plea, the
council unanimously voted to have the duplex demolished and the rubble removed.
"It's in such a state of disrepair, I don't know if it could even be
fixed regardless of the amount of money you had," said city council member Dan
Bostrom.
The cost of razing dwellings this size is usually between
$12,000 and $18,000, which is charged to the property owner.
Many homes
like this one are poorly constructed to start with, end up outliving their
usefulness and can become money pits, Bostrom said.
"These are the kinds
of properties that begin to drag down prices of other houses in the
neighborhood," he added. "A rotten apple spoils the barrel."
Ahrndt will
still own the land after it's been cleared of the building, and it's up to him
what to do next. He could rebuild or he could sell the lot.
Ahrndt said
he doesn't know what he will do once the building is torn down, especially since
the city has now left him with a property that he said can't be
resold.
"This is theft by swindle," he asserted, adding that the city
hasn't proven its case as to why the building needs to be torn down. He also
said it has yet to be explained to him what the raze and removal order
means.
If the city does end up demolishing the home, and Ahrndt doesn't
pay the demolition bill, Ramsey County could seize the property. Then, the
future of the lot adjacent to the park pathway could be up to the
county.
"It's a prominent corner, and when Furness Parkway is finished,
it will be a fairly significant corner," Repke said. He hopes that, whatever
happens, it will improve the view at the intersection of Maryland Avenue and
Hazel Street.
"There will be block club leaders who will be very happy
(to see the duplex torn down)," McCall said. "There will probably be people
cracking champagne bottles."
Kaitlyn Egan can be reached at
kegan@lillienews.com or 651-748-7816.1901 Maryland Ave. East has been torn down, but its saga continues
The long saga of 1901 Maryland Ave. East took another strange turn on Wednesday, Jan. 16, when the St. Paul City Council heard the former homeowner’s appeal of a $12,000 demolition assessment. The house, which was declared a nuisance property and unlivable by the city’s Department of Safety and Inspections, has been torn down, and property owner Michael Ahrndt, of Scandia, has been left to foot the demolition bill.
Robert Humphrey, a spokesman for the Department of Safety and Inspections, said in an interview that the single-story house was structurally unsound and it generated frequent complaints from neighbors, who considered it a dangerous eyesore. Records show Ahrndt bought the property in August 1999 for $47,500.
On Wednesday, Ahrndt appealed the $12,000 assessment to the city council, without success. There were plenty of fireworks coming from Ahrndt, but the most fiery of them emerged at the end of his testimony, right before he left a kind of verbal condemnation on the city council in the native Dakota language.
His lengthy testimony is recorded on video, and listed under Item No. 42 on the City Council agenda.
Ahrndt told the council, “My answer here, this matter is now turned over to divine judgment. God’s way shall rule, and I believe you shall, for the sake of your souls, council, come to see that God’s thoughts are higher than your thoughts, and God’s ways are higher than your ways. The great spirit is absolute. So people of St. Paul, here me well. Awaken to what takes place right here before you. There is a great transformation underway. The wicked shall find no sanctuary. There shall be restitution. Reconciliation is near. The city of St. Paul, as you discover yourself under siege of the greatest of all powers, repent, I suggest. … Behold the power of God, lesser council. … I believe this self-serving behavior to be unforgivable. But that shall be your eternal business with God.”
Then came the condemnation in Dakota.
Ahrndt also asked the council members to resign immediately, and said “hundreds and perhaps even thousands of the extremely poor, completely despaired young children” would be deprived of his services by the tear-down.
He started his appeal on more technical footing. Ahrndt said “this ludicrous, preposterous, completely absurd assessment brought against myself, my family, my ministry and those I care-give to, this fiendish surtax with its egotistical motives” was three times the size of demolition estimates he received for the tear-down from licensed contractors.
He also said his “nonprofit foundation” purchased the small house more than a decade ago for care-giving and youth services. Green space associated with the Furness Parkway project directly abuts his house, and Ahrndt claims the road’s proximity made his house “unmarketable.”
Kaitlyn Egan, news editor at the weekly East Side Review, delved into the ins and outs of Ahrndt’s long-running battle with City Hall in April 2012, and it’s worth a read, here. |