HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 91-C0300
RESOLUTION NO. 91-C30
A RESOLUTION OF -THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AZUSA DENYING THE PUBLIC NUISANCE
APPEAL OF ERNEST A. HAMEL AND DETERMINING
THAT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 937 NORTH
AZUSA AVENUE IS SUBSTANDARD FOR PURPOSES
OF IMPLEMENTING SECTION 17274 OF THE
CALIFORNIA REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AZUSA DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Azusa
does hereby find, determine and declare that:
A. On July 17, 1990, written notice was sent
to Ernest A. Hamel, Jr. the owner of record of
the subject property, notifying him that the
subject property was in violation of the Azusa
Municipal Code, and admonishing Mr. Hamel of
the provisions set forth in Section 17274 of
the California Revenue and Taxation Code.
B. On August 16, 1990, a duly noticed hear-
ing was held to determine whether or not the
property located at 937 North Azusa Avenue
(hereinafter "Subject Property") constitutes a
public nuisance as defined in Section
15.08.010 of the Azusa Municipal Code. The
Hearing Officer determined that the subject
property was in violation of the Azusa
Municipal Code because of general dilapidation
and substandard housing conditions.
C. On September 4, 1990, a duly noticed
hearing was held before the City Council of
the City of Azusa pursuant to the provisions
of Section 15.08.010 of the Azusa Municipal
Code on the appeal of Mr. Hamel to the August
16, 1990 decision of the Hearing Officer.
Evidence was received from the City through
its Community Improvement Manager, David
Rudisel, and from Mr. Hamel. On September 17,
1990, the City Council adopted RESOLUTION NO.
9935, denying the public nuisance appeal and
ordering abatement of all conditions
constituting a public nuisance thereon.
D. On January 24, 1991, after inspection of
the property revealed that the property was
still not in -compliance with the Municipal
Code, another written notice of noncompliance
was sent to Mr. Hamel. Said notice was in
such form and included such information as is
prescribed by the Franchise Tax Board, and was
mailed by certified mail to his last known
address by certified mail. Said notice
-1-
apc/RES000306
03/26/91
r
advised Mr. Hamel of the City's intent to
notify the Franchise Tax Board of his
noncompliance within 10 days if an appeal was
not filed by him with the City Council, and of
the general tax consequences of such filing
with the Franchise Tax Board.
E. On February 4, 1991, an appeal was filed
by Mr. Hamel to the notice described in
Subparagraph D. Thereafter, a hearing date
was set before the Azusa City Council for
March 4, 1991. A hearing was held before the
Azusa City Council on March 4 and then
continued to March 18, 1991 at which time
evidence was received from Mr. Hamel.
Evidence was also received by the City through
its Community Improvement Manager, David
Rudisel.
SECTION 2. Having considered all of the evi-
dence presented to it at the hearing held on March 4 and 18,
1991, the City Council specifically finds, determines and
declares that:
A. The property located at 937 North Azusa
Avenue remains in a substandard condition, and
has so remained for over six (6) months, as
described in Resolution No. 9935, and
B. The property was not rendered substandard
solely by reason of earthquake, flood or other
natural disaster, and
C. The owner of the property, Mr. Hamel, has
not secured financing to bring such housing
into compliance with the Municipal Code, nor
have repairs or other work necessary to bring
such housing into compliance commenced on the
property, and
D. The owner of the property has not
attempted to secure financing to bring the
property into compliance with the Municipal
Code, and
E. Such financing has not been denied solely
because such housing is located in a neighbor-
hood or geographical area in which financial
institutions do not provide financing for
rehabilitation of any such housing, and
F. The property has not been rendered
substandard solely by reason of a change in
applicable state or local housing standards.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall mail to the
Franchise Tax Board and Mr. Hamel a notice of noncompliance,
which notice shall be in such form and include such
information as may be prescribed by the Franchise Tax Board,
in accordance with section 17274 of the California Revenue
and Taxation Code and this Resolution.
-2-
apc/RES000106
03/26/91
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify the
adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 1Rt day
Of April , 1991 .
1P
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was
duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Azusa at a
regular meeting thereof, held on the 1st day of
April , 1991 by the following vote of the
Council:
AYES:
DANGLEIS, STEMRICH, NARANJO
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS ALEXANDER, MOSES
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS NONE
apc/RES000106
03/26/91
-3-