Transcript: Construction and Property Maintenance Code Board of Appeals Meeting

Chair

Having 3:30, we will open the meeting, the uh, City of Dover Construction and Property Maintenance Code Board of Appeals, and we'd like to welcome everyone. Prior to accepting the agenda, there's been a request for a minor modification that item number two be heard first. Item number two, the residential code violation appeal, chapter 22 of buildings and building regulations, article three, building code, section 20-20- section 22-68, International Residential Code, adopted 2009, section R302.1 exterior walls, appeal of denied building permit, 321 Charlie Crossing Drive, Syeda Austin then. It's been asked that we move that item to item number one. All right, so...

Board Members

Aye.

Chair

By consent, the motion carries. So with that said, um, we'll we'll open that item up, um, and I'll ask code enforcement, a representative of code enforcement, sir, um, to present your your case. Welcome. We do have Ms. Syeda, Syeda, Syeda, and...

Speaker 1

Jesse, okay.

Speaker 2

Oh, hi Jesse.

Chair

Jesse. Jesse for Jesse for item Jesse for item

Speaker 1

Didn't know all that was happening.

Chair

for number one, that's fine. All right.

Matthew Brown

Good afternoon. Uh Matthew Brown with the City of Dover Fire Marshal's Office. Uh for the last year I've also been the liaison for the building department and our third-party plan...

Board Member 1

Move to uh uh accept the agenda as amended.

Board Member 2

Second.

Chair

It's been properly moved and seconded.

Board Member 1

With changes, yeah.

Chair

Yeah. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Jason Loar

review company who is Dave Maples, sitting to my left. Uh he is with Code Solutions International, and they currently conduct all of our plan review for commercial and residential structures for compliance with code. Um this uh appeal is for a deck that is off the backside of a townhouse um where it was uh for one reason or another needed to be replaced. Uh permit was properly submitted uh, reviewed, and then denied by our plan reviewer. I'm going to let Dave speak to the exact code, reasoning, and interpretation um of what it was denied for.

Dave Maples

Good afternoon, I'm Dave Maples. Uh company owner, managing member of Code Solutions International. Um quick background: I've been doing code enforcement, plan review, inspections for 26 years. Right now, I'm the only active Master Code Professional in the state of Delaware um to achieve that level of certification. Uh we've been doing the plan review for the City of Dover for I guess a year and a half, 2 years. Um specific to this project, um there were no issues whatsoever with the deck's proposed structure. Uh the values as far as the load-bearing members were checked and validated. There's no issue with that whatsoever. The issue revolves around its proximity to the lot line uh between it and the neighboring property. So under the 2009 International Residential Code, Section 302.1, there is a table that goes along with that section, and the premise deals with what's called fire separation distance. The distance of construction from lot lines. Um that table

Unknown Speaker

um, specifically lists projections as not being allowed, and I'll explain projections in a second. Projections are not permitted uh within 2 ft of a lot line. They are permitted from 3 ft to 5 ft as long as they are rated to a 1-hour fire resistance rating as exposed from the underside. Outside of 5 ft, there are no restrictions. This application came to, it looks like it was received by the city on September 17th, 2025. Uh we were given the review. The review was conducted on September 24th, 2025. And the initial uh comment letter that was issued uh, specified that we needed a site plan or plot plan to show the location of the deck and location in proximity to the lot line. Uh again, nothing structural was noted. It was just the fire separation distance. Um the original plot plan that we got did not show the location of the proposed deck structure. So subsequent to our comment letter, we got a a resubmission which does show the location of the proposed deck and steps, and it is immediately on the adjoining lot line to the property. Um that's what was presented to us, so the comment letter was revived re- revised to more specifically cite 302.1 for a fire separation distance violation. The deck is not permitted to be within 2 ft and not rated um 2 ft of the lot line. The section of the code, to to get back to the projection section, um the code does not in the body of the code say that a deck is a projection. Back in 2000-

City Staff

3-2004, the International Code Council, which was just founded in the year 2000, issued a a binding opinion. And I included that in the context of my comment letter that that opinion clearly specifies that decks are projections and are subject to that table that I just mentioned. That opinion has never been modified. It existed in 2003-2004, it still exists today. The code, I have the code up on my iPad. I actually have the 2024 code up right now. It reads exactly the same as it did in 2003 and in 2009, which applies to this specific structure. So that's how I got to the conclusion that I issued.

Board Chair

Thank you. The chair recognizes Councilman Rocha.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um so I'm just trying to follow the sequence. The the application was submitted?

City Staff

Yes.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

And at that point, because you didn't have basically a drawing of where the deck was going to go, then it was sent back to the person who submitted the application?

Unknown Speaker

It's all one. Yes. Okay, that's understood. Yeah.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Um, so was the deck built—

Appellant

before I got there. This is this is the deck. This is what was there in 2003, 2004, 2005. It's the same deck. Has not been updated, has not been changed, it's falling apart.

City Staff

Correct.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

And then then the application was resubmitted and you noticed that it was it looked like it was going to be too close to the lot line, right?

City Staff

We were given a a plot plan that shows the deck and steps on the lot line.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

But for for for only point, are you are we able to, would you, did you have anymore, Mr. Rocha, to recognize her in her explanation or they done?

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

On the lot line, sir. And this is not a corner lot, this is directly behind the uh unit?

City Staff

Correct. Yeah, it's an interior lot line.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Um, that's just that kind of I'm a little clear. Yeah, I'll I'll I'll yield for right now.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Okay.

City Staff

It's common to the to the house, the townhouse next door.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Okay, yield. I'm The chair's going to recognize, um, Austin for explanation with pictures.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

The the lot line is all go-

Appellant

So I bought this home in 2021. The home came with a shared deck. The deck is one deck for the shared backyard area there, I guess. I don't really know what else to say about that. It's one deck for both units. We share a property line, so I'm not sure how I'm supposed to put fire retardant materials only on my side if we share that line, like, and then it's also a safety hazard and your, like, I'm just

Austin

Well, if I could address that, the deck wasn't presented as a shared deck. It was presented as a completely freestanding structure attached to your property. It wasn't attached to the adjacent property.

Appellant

How is this not attached to the adjacent property?

Austin

I'm just saying, ma'am, that's how it was presented to me. Was it it was a deck exclusive to your property.

Appellant

Well, isn't the deck and the clauses and all the information the same from 2003 and 2004 as it is 20 years later?

Austin

They were the same back then, but I wasn't here back then.

Roy Sudler, Jr.

Okay. Okay. So with so with that explanation, does that change anything?

Austin

No, it does not. So, that was a little

City Staff

legally existing non-conforming deck, it could stay there. It was legally approved back then, I can only assume that that was the case. But the moment that that deck is reconstructed, if it's torn down and rebuilt, you have to build it to the current standard.

Appellant

So current standard states that it has to be 2 ft away. So if I make it 2 ft away, how do you then come out of the sliding glass door that is on the deck?

City Staff

We weren't given that information.

Appellant

You weren't. Okay. Okay, maybe you were not, but with prior information, and the information that is given, and information that you do know, are we

City Staff

So what I would suggest is that the designer who who submitted these plans include all of that information. I honestly don't think you can go back there. I don't want to make you move the slider, certainly. That's not my intention. I can only evaluate the deck as it was presented to me. I don't think you can go back without moving the slider with a combustible deck that close to the lot line. I think it has to be a non-combustible deck. At a minimum, it's going to have to be fire-resistant rated, and that's a modification of what the code even says. So I can only apply the code as written. I can't offer solutions, and I can't tell you explain why it was allowed to be that way. I can only evaluate the deck as it

Speaker 1

usable.

Speaker 2

usable. So to make it usable, make it make it functional, make it safe, is that what I hear you saying?

Speaker 1

Yes.

Speaker 2

Now because of your because of that action, that the changes now require additional actions that that am I is it safe to say from code enforcement or or that required an additional cost or additional additional structure redesign? How How How does that Can you explain to me me at a novice level, if it's there's no room for, what I wrote, there's no room for separation of her line. Of the separation of line. So now So now really is the It sounds like the only recourse is the material being used, is that what I hear you saying?

Appellant

So is it not grandfathered in?

City Staff

It is. That's legally existing non-conforming. But when you remove the deck to build a new one, you lose that status. You don't get the right to go back in that same

Board Member

Did you did you build a new deck? Or did you

Appellant

No, this is still falling down. This is still a safety hazard. This is still a code issue.

Board Member

So the deck is being

Appellant

Nothing.

Board Member

The deck is not being used because of safety?

Appellant

Yeah.

Board Member

So you were your intent was to fix the deck?

Appellant

Fix the deck, make it new. So to be able to make, you know, uh

Speaker 1

Right.

Speaker 3

And this this is this is presented as a teardown and rebuild. Um if this was a repair, correct me if I'm wrong, if this was a repair and not a teardown, you could keep the existing layout. But if you tear down and build new, that's where you can't be within the two feet of the lot line. And that's so if there's a fire on your deck, it doesn't transfer to the next deck over, which is somebody else's property.

Appellant

Now, no, no, now the home is not. Nothing is up to fire code per this new 2024 law. So why would I be the one to have If nothing else is fire-retardant, why would the deck be fire-retardant?

City Official

So the explanation is you're the one that came to the city to rebuild the deck. That's That's why it's your responsibility, just your deck. You're not responsible for your adjoining properties.

Appellant

Right, but there's nothing disconnecting the decks right now. So that's why I'm like how can we We share a deck. It's one piece. Like how can we add fire safety to one side and not the other side?

Speaker 4

So, if my deck catches on fire today with the coding that you all have right now, no fire safety, her side doesn't have any fire safety, then what?

Appellant

But you're telling me I'm responsible for both sides of the deck because it's on a shared property line.

City Official

No, I'm I'm telling you you're responsible for your deck. So the fire separation distance applies to everyone. If your your neighbor comes in with a new application to build a new deck, they're going to be subject to the same rules. It would be exactly the same.

Speaker 1

Right.

City Official

So you're you're starting to ask questions of a design aspect. I can't offer you design solutions. I'm not permitted to do that. I can only apply what the code says.

Speaker 3

What's your question?

Speaker 4

The question is, what happens then? Because you're telling me if I spend this extra $6,000 today to make my deck fire safety uh, you know, to that standard and her deck is not, the next the door next to me is not,

Appellant

Okay, so the code says I cannot have a new deck because it has to have fire safety.

Appellant

Where if we're sharing a line, how can I add the fire separation? How can I do that? If we share a line, how can we add fire separation on a line that is one?

City Official

That's not what I said.

Appellant

It's denied, my permit is denied is what you told me.

City Official

Everything I said is in the letter.

Board Member

All right. Stand by. Stand by, 1.

City Official

So that it's a question for your designer. There are ways to do that, and I'll give you an example: your house, the physical structure of your house is fire separated from the house next door, presumably so.

Appellant

Presumably.

City Official

The code right now says that the wall between townhouses has to be rated at two hours. So presumably, the two houses have that fire separation. That wall does not extend out and separate the decks. That's where the disconnect is.

Board Chair

Uh, the the Chair recognizes Council President Fred Neil.

Fred A. Neil

Uh, in other words, I understand she can have her designer fix the existing deck with fireproofing material without having to rebuild the whole thing?

City Staff

I don't know how bad the deck is now. I don't know if it can be salvaged.

Fred A. Neil

So if it can be salvaged and doesn't have to be totally torn down and brought back up, she can have that redesigned if she goes back to her designer and and says, okay, we can't take the whole thing down. Can you save this deck? And I have to just the materials that have to be used have to be the fire-retardant materials.

City Staff

It's accurate to a point. Um, so we get into a situation of the difference definition of a repair versus a rebuild. So the repair would have to be a replacement of materials that are not structural in nature. Yes. So if she wanted to replace the decking boards themselves, she could do that. If she wanted to replace the the treads on the stairs, she could do that. If she wanted to replace the stair stringers with in-kind stair stringers or the beams on the deck with in-kind beams, non-rated, that can't happen. That move moves from a repair into a a rebuild, a reconstruction. So it's the structural nature. Because she wants she applied to tear down the deck and build brand new, this came into play. If she applied for just a repair, just to replace materials in kind, we could evaluate that, but I would need to know specifically what they would be asking at that point. So hypothetically, it's possible.

Fred A. Neil

So hypothetically she could go back to that designer—

Board Member 1

planner with that information, so that it's very possible that it can be done within her budget to do so.

Staff Member

It's possible. We don't know that. I don't know that.

Board Member 1

We don't know that, but as long as it's not torn down and rebuilt, then she has a chance to rehab that with fireproofing material.

Staff Member

And it it doesn't have to be fire- it wouldn't have to be fire-resistant-rated material, because it no longer qualifies under the Residential Code for a permit. So now we're into the Property Maintenance Code. So if it's not a reconstruction, and tear that down and rebuild, the IRC doesn't apply.

Board Member 1

So if we would vote not to grant this at this time, it doesn't mean she won't get a new deck. It means that she has to...

Board Member 2

Change.

Board Member 1

...do a work it differently in order to get her deck. Because it would no longer be a new deck.

Staff Member

There are other solutions. Yeah. To get there. I don't know what they are, and I don't want to spend her money for her. I can only tell you what the code's saying.

Board Member 1

Okay. I think I understand. I mean, if we turn her down at this time, we're not going to accept it, she can still find the function for making sure that the designer is working with the city, as it make sure that it's okay.

Staff Member

There are other alternatives.

Board Member 1

Yes, sir, that can be achieved. That's the point I'm making. Alternatives, even if we say no.

Board Member 3

Sorry. Go ahead.

Board Member 3

Um, the City of Dover strives to be customer service friendly uh for our constituents, for our homeowners, um um and I get your standpoint, I wouldn't want to rubber stamp anything...

Andre M. Boggerty

...even from my profession, but from a place of of being a novice, what the options, I wouldn't even know what my options are. So, is there a place that that that our our constituent can go find, hey, these are the options outside of tearing this down? So, I I I commend the fact that someone wants to make their deck safe.

Andre M. Boggerty

Um, spring's coming, summer's coming, and, you know, so. What what where could where could one find the options to comply without absorbing the cost to replace it? Is that Is that a fair question?

City Staff

So, all the codes, even the ones that the City of Dover uses, they're all available for free online. The disconnect is that they're very difficult to read without a background and to understand how to apply them. Um, but this particular applicant hired a a licensed contractor. That would be the resource. I would strongly advise going back to them to develop other design solutions because I I know the company, I've worked with them for years. They're all they they're they're good enough to know that there are alternatives out there. So, that would be my first phone call to see what they can offer as a reasonable accommodation.

City Staff

...the board oversees both construction appeals and property maintenance...

Board Member

Oh, we just hadn't had a construction appeal.

City Staff

That's correct. This is the first one in a long time.

Board Member

Yeah, yeah, okay. That's what I...

City Staff

We combined—the City in our Charter combines the two boards into one, so that's why you're seeing the violation wording in there.

Andre M. Boggerty

Okay. Thank you.

Chair

Chair recognizes Councilman Rocha.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

So, just quick question. How did we get here? You guys didn't write her up or anything, did you?

Board Member

Now, I happen to be a big fan of Penn & Teller. You know who they are? Magicians. A great show, what have you. And when they watch these other magicians, you know, other magicians' work, they don't tell the whole story, but they say, they talk in code. And I think we've talked in code today. So, if we turn you down, we're talking in code to show that there's alternatives that you have not explored yet, because you didn't know to explore them. So...

Andre M. Boggerty

She submitted—

City Staff

They wanted to rebuild a deck. It fell in and—

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Yeah, but it Okay. All right. But it says code violation appeal, so I don't I'm trying to figure out where the violation came from.

Andre M. Boggerty

It's just to appeal a denied permit.

Gerald L. Rocha, Sr.

Right.

Andre M. Boggerty

They didn't grant her a permit.

City Staff

Well, I think this the the—

Appellant

I did find that via the website, but...

Board Member

I understand. But there's a code. We're not, you know, we're not being mean, but we're following the laws that we set up to protect people. So, I'm going to move that we reject your appeal, on the understanding that you can still get this done, and that it'll probably save you some money at the same time, and keep you as, you know, safe through the process. And that's my motion.

A woman

A tear down cost.

Board Member 1

That's correct. Okay, but I think you go through the process that is not tore down. So then you you won't have to face this. Okay.

A woman

Okay.

Board Member 1

Okay. Can you do that?

A woman

Okay. We'll do that. Thank you.

Councilman

Council will get back to that on that.

A man

Mr. Chairman, we're going to step out as well the rest is code enforcement so

Board Member

Second.

Board Member 1

Okay.

Chair

It's been properly moved and seconded. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor, signify by saying aye.

A man

you don't need us for anything. All right, thank you.

Board Member 1

Thank you, Brian. Thank you.

A woman

Thank you, Board.

Board Member 1

Thank you.

A woman

Thanks. Thank you.

Board Member

Aye. Aye.

Chair

All those opposed? The motion carries, and the appeal is denied with...

A woman

You have a good day.

Board Member

And we wish you the best, yes.

Board Member 1

Give everybody a few minutes.

Appellant

So, to—just to reiterate, I need to have Advance resubmit the permit without...

A man

Thank you. See ya.

A woman

Oh, I'm so sorry.

Board Member 1

He says you're welcome.

A woman

Thank you.

Councilman

I wasn't listening. You're welcome. Thanks for your time.

Board Member 1

We we always strive to give as much information to our constituents. This is Take care. Thank you.

Board Member 1

All right. With that said, we are here with um our now number two item, but one, Hearing Number One, a property maintenance code violation. Chapter 22, buildings and building regulations, article 12, vacant building section 22-403, registration period, and registration fees. Appeal of registration fee for the property located at 3074 North DuPont Highway and Jesse Adams, owner.

Board Member 2

Oh we've been here before I think.

Board Member 1

Yeah, we've been here before. Um so, you know, um

Board Member 1

well, what I would like to do is the Chair would like to recognize the representative from Code Enforcement.

City Staff

Unfortunately, I missed the last meeting. Prior to that, I was code enforcement for four years in Pennsylvania, so you have some background.

City Staff

Um, this case opened up back in May 16th of 2019 under at that time, Ron Coburn, who took care of vacant buildings.

City Staff

Um, it was registered on June 17th, 2019. Uh, the first year fee of $375 was paid.

City Staff

Um, the second year uh fee was transferred to customer service uh on September 1st, 2020. That was $750.

City Staff

The third year fee for this property was uh $1,500. That was paid um on June on July 19th, 2021.

City Staff

The fourth year fee of $3,000 uh got an exemption um by Ron Coburn on June 18th, 2020.

City Staff

And again, uh the fifth year fee of $5,000 got an exemption on August 7th, 2023. Um, that's when I took care of that.

City Staff

The sixth year fee of $5,000 um on uh it was issued in in July of 2024. At that time, uh Mr. Allen appealed the fee for that year, and we had a Construction and Property Maintenance Code uh Board of Appeals on August 7th, 2024. Uh, I was not able to attend that meeting,

City Staff

Code Enforcement Officer Cierra Brown took care of the case for me that day. Um, during that process, um, it came that the appeal was denied for the $5,000. Um, so the sixth-year fee of $5,000 was paid August 19th, 2024. Um, this year, the letter went out September 17th, 2025 for the seventh-year fee of $5,000. Uh, since then, Mr. Allen has corresponded with me um and requested an exemption. Uh, he was directed to the city clerk's office for uh apply for for an appeal. Um, and so that's where we are today. Um, as of as of January 5th, two days ago, uh, this permit has been renewed six times for renovation permit. Um, all six all six times, there has not been a single inspection at this property. Um, and come July, there won't be any more excep- uh exemptions. He's going to have to reapply the whole permit process again. Um, the the building still vacant. Uh, there has been progress uh over the months, um, but it still remains vacant. Uh, and so therefore, uh, in my opinion, that this $5,000, based on the ordinance-

Appellant

...remains.

Chair

Thank you. What progress has been made? Do you have pictures or anything?

Appellant

No, I don't have pictures.

Appellant

I have I have pictures if you want to see some pictures. I don't know, do you have some?

Female Speaker

I have some. I've just got to look for them. I'm sorry. The case file... This is from uh 2024...

Female Speaker

I know I got it in here.

Chair

In the meantime, while the pictures are coming up, does anyone have any questions?

Fred A. Neil

Yeah, I have a question.

Chair

Doc, the Chair recognizes Council President Neil.

Fred A. Neil

Thank you. Uh, what kind of uh police activity has been noted on this property? Do you have anything on that?

Eddie Kopp

That's unknown.

Fred A. Neil

Unknown. You don't know how many times they've been called to the property?

Eddie Kopp

No.

Female Speaker

Oh, that's another property.

Eddie Kopp

If I could while we wait, um...

Chair

Chair Neil, uh Council President, you have anything else?

Fred A. Neil

Can't see the pictures. Thank you.

Chair

No problem. Go ahead Eddie.

Eddie Kopp

So, um Eddie Kopp, Chief Code Enforcement Officer for the City of Dover. I just want to read the purpose from the Dover Code Section 22-400, the purpose of the vacant building ordinance into the record.

Eddie Kopp

The purpose... The purpose and intent of this article is to establish a registration and identification program of vacant buildings within the city. Vacant buildings are detrimental to the surrounding buildings and neighborhoods in which they exist. This article is to ensure the public health, safety, and welfare, in welfare, insofar as they are affected by vacant buildings within the city. The health, safety, and wel--

City Staff

welfare of neighborhoods in which vacant buildings are located are of the utmost importance to the city, and as in general community character in which these vacant buildings are located. That is the purpose of the vacant building ordinance, um, just for the record.

Chair

Thank you.

Chair

Chairman...

Property Owner

Um, like I said, um, I'm just doing the best I can. I'm doing it myself. So it takes a little bit more time than I wanted to, but like I said, right now, I have the front done. Going to put the rafters in this week, so that whole side is done, except for putting the siding. And I just had time to put siding. I work 50 hours a week, and I take 20 hours a week every weekend to work on that. So I am working faster than I was, and I put the windows in, you know, past week. So, got windows in, that's closed up, that's old, that's all torn out. So I tore all that out, because there was some rot there, so it takes me time. I had to put a new, um, support beam in it. And support beam on the front, that whole front was ate up, so I had to take that all off. So that's all done, that takes me a while. And you know, I'm just can't afford to have them do this job. And like I said, to me, I had that whole face taken off this week, and that whole side will be done this weekend. So right now, that whole piece is done, almost there. I just had- it was a little cold, and I didn't want to sit there and throw plyboard up on it, and be like a sail, sail me off to on the ground, so it takes a little bit, and like I said, it's been windy lately.

Speaker 1

And March is going to bring more wind, so I'm trying to get it done. I'm doing it as fast as I can.

Speaker 1

And, like I said, I don't like people on my property anyway. Now I have people kind of walking up on my stuff all the time.

Speaker 1

And I close it up really tight, and I actually um turn off the electric every time. I don't let let the electric run. And God knows what they'll do to that. I mean, they've they've already ransacked it. They got They got ahold of something last time. They took my wheelbarrow, they took a couple things out of there, but like I said, no police report because what's the point?

Speaker 1

Because everything behind me is not safe, anyway. You look at everything behind me, it's county. There's a trailer park on one side, and then God knows what's behind me. Uh, the McKenneys is behind me, the old, you know, the McKenney's place. They own the whole section of that piece, and everything around me is county.

Speaker 1

I came into the city to get water and sewer. So I have no- I must have been a stupid man at the time, thinking that they're going to bring it to the curb. Well, I didn't- I guess I didn't do my research good enough to figure that out. And I would have had it done, then the divorce came. That took me a little bit off, that took me out. And I didn't- I really didn't have possession of the property then. The court had the possession of the property, cuz I couldn't do anything to it. That was for two thousand, and then COVID hit. COVID, I couldn't get I can't get a 20-foot board to save my soul, 2x6. I could- went to Wyoming Mills, and went through 84 Lumber, and that stalled me because I could not get it for two years. They would not sell for me, sell to me. And then when I went to it, they were price gouging everything. I went to, um, I forget, there was a roofing place, and they wanted $100 for

Property Owner

a pack of shingles. And they're 50 $50 bucks. Like I said, 200% markup, that's crazy. So, I had my challenges. And my challenges were that. Thank you, Chair. Chairman.

Board Chairman

Yeah, what what's your estimated time of completion?

Property Owner

Well, I planned to get that whole side done, but I'm talking about the whole building.

Board Chairman

Whole building?

Property Owner

Mhm. Because I'd have to I'd have to probably would have to get sidewalks and stuff like that. I haven't got to that point where...

Board Chairman

Well, we're not talking about sidewalks, we're just talking about the building.

Property Owner

I hope to have that whole side done and the and and the old piece on the other side, and the two doors, and all the siding right there, I'm going to give myself till June, probably. I should have most of that done. Because like like I said, ripping off that ripping off, well, the damage that was done, water damage that was done to it, it was never done. And then they had the insulation stuck to the 2x6s all the way down, so it rotted out some pieces because of that. Because you're not supposed to put insulation, there was no air movement in the whole place. So I had to rip that out, too. So, I've I had my challenges with the building. And it's like I said, spruce. And I think I like it, but like I said, what it was before, just now. And what it what what it represent to your like the City of Dover, I don't know, I don't think it should have been there in the first place. It was an abortion from day one. So, you know, whoever had it before didn't take care of it very well. So when I got it, I looked at it, it looked okay, but you didn't see all the rot on top of the roof, either. And the rot was real bad.

Property Owner

Now I replaced all that, reframed it, and reframed the sides and everything else. If anybody can see the back of it, the back of it's almost done. And like I said, that's all. Like I said, that's that's a good picture, like I said, but the back's a lot better than the front. They saw it. It's almost done.

Board Member

Yeah, we saw new pictures on what was taken. Was it yesterday?

Property Owner

Yeah. The back is almost done, but I'm told it's on the short side so I couldn't get to the top of it. And I had to rig something up to get to the top, and I didn't have time and I've not done that yet. All right.

Board Chair

Thank you. The chair recognizes uh Mr. Kopp.

Eddie Kopp

Um, just for the record, as established on the August 7th, 2024 uh Property Maintenance Code Board of Appeals, the vacant it was determined the building has been vacant since 2013. So, we're although the city has the seventh-year vacant building fee, the building's been vacant for going this will be the 13th year that it's been vacant. Um, so it's going to be the position of the city to deny the appeal based off of the intent of the vacant building ordinance. Um, it's not meeting the intent. It's not there's no permits that have been followed through. Um, there hasn't been a single inspection, so even the work that's being done, we can't verify that because not a single inspection has been scheduled. So, I know we're looking at pictures, but without them inspections being scheduled, we don't know if the work is done up to code. And why that's important is if you're missing inspections, you might potentially have to undo what you've already done because you didn't get their their rough um initial inspections. So, although we're looking at pictures of some finished product, without them inspections, it's it's void.

Appellant

how do I know what plan these inspections? I didn't know whether to plan it.

City Staff

So that's within the permit. It's all spelled out on the permit that's issued.

Appellant

I didn't read that.

City Staff

And it's printed out. Each time you renew your permit, it's printed out every single...

Appellant

So, I need to go and get you get one of you guys to look at what I've done.

City Staff

Yeah, it's it's all printed out on your permit. Everything's explained on the permit.

Board Member

Not us. The building department.

City Staff

Yeah. But it's all on your permit, sir. Every time you renew that permit and they reprint it, it's all on it's all established on the permit.

Appellant

Yeah, it's always a piece of paper that tell me I can do so.

Board Member

But just so you're aware, come July, you're not going to be able to get any more permits.

Appellant

What if I sell the building?

Board Member

You're going to have to apply all again.

Appellant

So, if I sell the building before then, then then if they can they reapply what I've done to it or...

City Staff

No, so...

Appellant

How's that work?

City Staff

If you sell the building, you just sell the building. It doesn't— we'll still be in the same boat. It still has to have them inspections. So the work being done regardless who the owner is, it has to be inspected, it has to be signed off on it, a CO has to be issued to the property. So regardless if it sells five times, it doesn't matter. Whatever you've done so far could potentially be undone because it's not up to code.

Code Official

see every step of it. Because when we sign off as code officials, when we sign off, we're assuming that liability. So if it's not done correctly, and something happens, or the building collapses, it falls back on us. That's why we make sure we don't cut shortcuts, we make sure to check every little part of the building.

Appellant

I understand that part.

City Staff

So, even if you sell the sell the building, you would have to um you would have to explain if there's code violations on the property that you have a permit with no inspections. You have to disclose all of that to your seller.

Appellant

So, I need to I need to schedule a a...

Appellant

Okay.

Code Official

All right? And it's just to keep everyone safe.

City Staff

You'd have to— Yeah. My recommendation at this point would schedule an inspection for what you've done before moving forward, because you could potentially it might have to be undone if it's not up to code.

Appellant

I just don't know why they'd tell me that now.

Code Official

It's on the permit.

Appellant

When I was at the last one you guys should've- well, you're saying it's on the permit, but I didn't read that part.

Meeting Chair

All right. Well, um, thank you. I think we've heard, um, enough unless there's any new information as it pertains to this particular matter. Um, um that said, there's no- I think everybody has made their comments. Council President?

Appellant

I think I did a pretty damn good job.

City Staff

Right, but...

Board Member

if they can't see it, they're going to make you pull it off.

Appellant

They can see it. You can look and see the sides right now.

City Staff

Right. But you actually have to...

Council President

Yeah, I I'm looking at you, there used to be a comic strip, I think it was part of Dick Tracy or one of those, or Li'l Abner,

Appellant

That's way back.

Council President

where the guy had a he walked around with with a cloud over his head. And you walked around with a cloud over your head. All the steps that you've had, I have printed out more for you than I have for any other appeal in terms of seeing what you've said and what's happened. The the fact that the initial report said you have to make sure that you knew what the wood was, this was 2018. I have the documents here on that and of the situation. All of those problems that you've related, is Joe Btfsplk, and he was the guy with a cloud. Walked around with a cloud over his head.

Board Member

that it's continuing on. And if that how how long you want to go with it? That's the same thing basically. These buildings are danger to you because the termites they're in inside are eating away or viewing and they're not the ones that go underneath the ground and eat from there. So there's problems there. The law is there for a purpose. And I I'm going to move to reject the appeal.

Appellant

There's way too many.

Council President

Even though I sympathize tremendously, you just made a bad gamble on this one. And it hasn't paid off. And I think in terms of the city, we have to turn it down. I mean, that's my personal feeling.

Board Member

Second.

Chair

It's been properly moved and seconded. Are you ready for the question? All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Board Members

Aye.

Chair

The uh the appeal has been denied uh therefore, as stated, um that's it. The appeal's been denied. So, all right, um any other questions, comments, concerns? If not, I move for adjournment of the

Chair

City of Dover Construction and Property Maintenance Code Board of Appeals. All in favor signify by saying aye.

Board Members

Aye.

Chair

We're adjourned. All right.

Public Commenter

Can I get my pictures back?

City Staff

Oh, man. They're They're for the case file.

Public Commenter

I was trying to Oh, man. Snatch the pictures.

City Staff

You need me You need me to make a copy of them and give them to Crystal? Once they're presented, they have to be put on the record. Okay.

Board Member

And Crystal, you need our packets back, right?

Crystal

If you want to keep them, you can keep them.