We were writing again Friday about examples of urban indifference, and it sparked a conversation about the derelict Hickman Building, a prominent eyesore for the YMCA/downtown school neighborhood, and its “temporary” fence.
First, here’s some information on the building:
From Memphis Daily News, 2005: The Hickman Building is located at 240 Madison Ave. Built as a medical arts building, the property is being marketed for residential use with possible commercial retail space on the first floor. The 99,159-square-foot property is owned by Hickman Properties Inc. and was appraised in 2005 at $277,900. Joe Cooper transferred the property for $35,000 to Hickman Properties Inc. in 1993, after Thomas Cates quitclaimed the property to him in 1993.
One downtown observer says tenants vacated the Hickman Building April, 1971. Downtown Memphis Commission said asking price is $1.9 million and agent on property is Chris Agee at 767-1383 or 484-5740.
Here’s the conversation:
John said:
The Hickman has ridden out the wave of unprecedented residential development, the lowest interest rates in history, the highest condo prices in history, the development of a $72 million ballpark across the street, a new elementary school next door, 400 new(ish) neighbors and the introduction of the trolley. Its current owner has outlasted this and two city mayors, three county mayors and three downtown development agency administrations. During this time 20 year tax abatements, subordinating low interest loans and historic preservation tax credits have all come and gone. Granted, its across the street neighbor is in a similar state… just with the lipstick in mural form… but surely the residents, visitors and employees of this area deserve a better effort than a fence?
Urbanut said:
The Hickman Building is an especially interesting case. The building serves as a high rise neighbor to an elementary school. Aerial photographs show that the annex structure to the north of the Hickman building now lacks a roof and the interior is open to the elements. Adjacent sidewalks are blocked by chain link fences presumably in order to safeguard the public from falling debris. That in and of itself should be reason to move against such owners in court. If a building presents a risk that warrants such a barrier and closing of the public domain, then should the owners not be financially responsible for their own negligence? In this case, the same records reflect that the building is not owned by a some financial institution or some absent landlord. No, we can find that the Hickman Building is owned by a local resident located in East Memphis. I for one would be very interested to understand such an individual’s motive in purchasing such a property and facilitating its continued decay and endangerment to the public.
Seeing as a common element and practice of owners that are incapable of maintaining their properties is to simply erect a chain link fence to absolve themselves of the risks inherent in the structure, I would propose the city enact a hefty right-of-way fee be enforced where any structure requires the closing of a sidewalk or street (or any public right of way) due to negligence or lack of maintenance for the property owner’s structures. If a daily fee is assessed for these situations we might see owners take more interest in their properties. Simple maintenance would be far cheaper than the daily fee and a lack of fencing would risk a lawsuit should someone be injured by these properties.
Gwyn said:
Urban: Love the right-of-way fee! If the government has to compensate landowners for taking their property (eminent domain), then landowners should compensate the government for taking their property (chain-link fences). Now, how to implement this strategy… I wonder if Judge Potter could use his Environmental Court?
Andy said:
Tom Leatherwood’s site says the Hickman Building at 240 Madison is owned by Hickman Properties at 5478 Pecan Grove Lane in Memphis. Maybe people should look up that phone number and start calling.
Urbanut said:
Andy, It is definitely tempting, but anything beyond neutral questions might have the opposite effect from a personal initiative standpoint.
Gwyn, These are the “standard” steps one must take to pass a local ordinance (you may already be familiar with these steps. If so chalk it up to general information. I borrowed this information from the web):
1. Research laws governing the issue.
Become familiar with the state and local laws addressing your selected issue. Information will be available from your city or county clerk and the appropriate state agencies. Local libraries and law libraries may also be useful places to conduct research. No need to create a new law when and where one already exists.
2. Find a model ordinance.
You will need a model ordinance to present to the city or county council. No need to reinvent the wheel here; simply find a sample ordinance or an actual ordinance that has previously passed in another locality. It is important that the language you submit has been reviewed thoroughly by you, by experts on the issue, and, if possible, by attorneys. Born Free USA can provide model ordinances on a variety of issues and assist with wording of ordinances.
3. Reach out to allies.
Developing a broad base of support will greatly increase the chances that your ordinance will be adopted. Look for support in the likely places, such as the Downtown Memphis Commission, Memphis City Schools (in this case seeing as an elementary school neighbors one of the sites mentioned), neighborhood residents, as well as neighboring business and property owners.
4. Know your opposition.
It is essential to become knowledgeable about the people and entities that your proposed ordinance will affect. Identify and understand potential objections to the ordinance and be able to present well thought-out counter-arguments.
5. Introduce your proposed ordinance.
Find a sympathetic council member to introduce the ordinance. Try to identify one who has introduced or supported quality of life and urban design legislation in the past, or ask your own councilperson to introduce the ordinance.
6. Start lobbying.
Once you have a sponsor and a bill number for your ordinance, you should begin lobbying. Provide the city or county council members with information packets about the bill. These packets should clearly and succinctly illustrate the need for the proposed ordinance. Mobilize a group of people, including grassroots organizations and local residents, to help publicize the issue through action alerts, letters to city councilpersons, op-ed pieces, etc.
7. Attend a public hearing.
Once the ordinance is introduced, a public hearing is likely. If a public hearing is scheduled, arrange for strong witnesses from diverse backgrounds to testify. Rally supporters to attend the hearing, as well.
8. Prepare for the vote.
When it is time for the vote, you will want to contact your city or county councilperson via phone, fax, or mailed letter to encourage him or her to vote in favor of the ordinance. Encourage as many other residents as possible to write their representatives.
Gwyn said:
Urbanut – Thanks! This is a great list & I will definitely use it.
Seeing as we are starting a new thread here, I will repost some info I also placed under the previous topic:
So finding existing ordinances pertaining to the closure or blocking of sidewalks did not take as long as I thought it would. Specifically reference the requirement in Sec. 12-28-5, Sub-paragraph A “…to keep clean and open”. Follow up post to define fines and punishment. Thank goodness for the internet…
Sec. 12-28-5 – Notice to property owner to build, repair or clean.
A. Whenever it is made to appear to the city engineer, or his or her lawfully authorized representative, that there has been a failure on the part of the owner of property to build, repair, or keep clean and open for public passage any sidewalk or walkway abutting on or adjacent to such property, the city engineer, or his or her duly authorized deputy, shall give notice to such owner, or his or her duly authorized agent, of the failure of such owner to build, repair, or keep clean and open for public passage such sidewalk or walkway.
B. Such notice may be given either by personal service on the owner or his or her duly authorized agent, or by certified letter addressed to the last known place of residence of such owner, or his or her duly authorized agent, and proof of the mailing of such registered letter by the city engineer, or his or her duly authorized deputy, shall be a complete compliance with this provision.
C. In the cases of nonresident or unknown owners, a publication of the notice by one insertion in a daily newspaper published in the city shall be a complete compliance with the provisions of this section as to notice.
D. The notice in each case shall specify what is required of the owner with respect to the sidewalk. The notice shall advise the owner that unless the requirement is carried out within thirty (30) days of the date of service, mailing or publication of the notice, the necessary work will be done by the city at the expense of the owner.
(Ord. 3590 § 1(12), 9-2-86; Code 1985 § 34-156; Ord. 894 § 1, 4-6-71; Code 1967 § 36-99)
Charter reference— Authority to compel property owners to build, repair and clean sidewalks, §§ 571, 572.
Sec. 12-28-6 – Failure of property owner to comply with notice.
A. Failure to comply with the provisions of this chapter and Chapter 12-24 shall be a misdemeanor subject to punishment as provided in Section 1-24-1 of this code.
B. Further, upon the failure, refusal or neglect of any person notified to comply with the terms and orders of a notice given pursuant to Section 12-28-5, the city engineer is authorized to build, repair, and keep clean and open for public passage any sidewalk or walkway abutting on or adjacent to the property of the person owning or controlling it. The cost of such work shall be a lien on such property, and may be enforced by suit in any court of competent jurisdiction.
C. As an additional and cumulative remedy, the city engineer may certify to the city treasurer the cost of such work. It shall be the duty of the city treasurer to place the amount so certified on the bill for city taxes assessed against the property abutting on or adjacent to the sidewalk or walkway laid. It shall be the duty of the city treasurer to collect, as a special tax, the amount so certified, which is declared to be a special improvement tax on the property abutting on, or adjacent to, such sidewalks or walkways. This special tax may be collected in the same manner as other general taxes are collected by the city.
What is “punishment as provided in Section 1-24-1” you might ask? This might be our problem, it amounts to little more than a financial slap on the wrist:
Sec. 1-24-1 – General penalty—Continuing violations.
A. Whenever in this Code or in any ordinance of the city any act is prohibited or is made or declared to be unlawful or an offense or a misdemeanor, or wherever in such code or ordinance the doing of any act is required or the failure to do any act is declared to be unlawful, and no specific penalty is provided therefor, the violation of any such provision of this Code or any such ordinance shall be punished by a fine of not more than fifty dollars ($50.00) for each separate violation; provided, however, that the infliction of a fine under the provisions of this Code or of any ordinance of the city shall not prevent the revocation of any permit or license for violation of any provisions hereof where called for or permitted under the provisions of this Code or of any ordinance. The city judges shall fix the amount of any fine to be levied under the provisions hereof as his or her discretion may dictate. Each day that any violation of this Code or of any ordinance continues shall constitute a separate offense.
B. Where any act of the General Assembly of the state provides for a greater minimum penalty than one dollar ($1.00), the minimum fine or penalty prescribed by the state law shall prevail, and be assessed by the city judges.
C.1. In addition to the provisions of subsections A and B of this section, and any court costs established by any city ordinance or state statute, the city is authorized to create and collect penalties, pursuant to T.C.A. Section 6-54-306, and in conformance therewith, to set a schedule specifying code section violation and penalty amount, and instituting a general penalty fund from which moneys may be disbursed.
2. The city comptroller shall be authorized to disburse allocations from the general penalty fund budget annually as approved by the council for implementing and maintaining programs as may be instituted for correction of ordinance violation. Each day constituting a separate offense and fine as set out in subsection A of this section, shall also be constituted as a corresponding separate penalty.
3. Penalties may be waived at the discretion of the judge; however, unless waived, penalties shall be assessed in the amount set out below:
Each code section violation for which a fine has been imposed, shall automatically carry a penalty of up to two hundred dollars ($200.00), except the following designated sections shall carry a minimum penalty of two hundred dollars ($200.00): This sections does not include blocking a sidewalk, thus I am assuming that the fine is capped at $50 as mentioned in section A.
So, has anybody done anything?
I think the question is- seeing as the penalties for such infractions are so inconsequential- do we as a group think there would be traction for proposing a harsher penalty to be applied where negligence on the part of a property owner requires the closing of a sidewalk or any other public right of way?
@Urbanut: I think that would be a good start. We should also probably look at the laws and ordinances of other cities as well to see how they deal with the owners of neglected properties and see if we can apply those same rules here.
Okay, I did a little research on ordinances regarding neglected properties and found something that was recently done about a year ago in Tulsa, Oklahoma:
http://www.newson6.com/story/12807614/city-of-tulsa-considers-crackdown-on-negligent-property-owners?redirected=true
I also looked up Tulsa’s Code of Ordinances as well:
http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientID=14783&stateID=36&statename=Oklahoma
Title 24, Chapter 1 had some information relative to nuisances and neglected properties (Section 103), but one of the things they added was a stiff penalty of up to $1000 per day as well as jail time (Section 106).
There may be some other codes, but this was the first one I was able to find relative to our discussion.