Technical > Home Improvement > Code enforcement demolishes House next door

reply to KrK

Re: Code enforcement demolishes House next door

reply to MaynardKrebs
Checking into the Tulsa law it's apparent the city would not have demolished the home unless they had already taken ownership of the property.

This explains the long delay. The process goes on something like this:

Property owners are absent and don't maintain property. City puts abatement notices up which aren't complied with. City levies fines and puts liens on the property (Back taxes, abatement.)

The properties sit and over time get more fines and more back taxes, they no longer will sell in any auction due to the liens.

Eventually the city takes ownership of the property, and then cleans it up (demolishes the eyesore.) This will also clear the liens and back taxes, it seems. (Not 100% sure on this but I doubt the city will fine itself.)

Under the law you cannot use adverse possession to take control of city property.

What will happen at some point down the road is the city will conduct a surplus property auction and the now empty lot will be sold.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

reply to KrK
Anyone else pop in here expecting something about Hugh Laurie?

No, ok just me.

reply to KrK

reply to MaynardKrebs
Yeah, it sounds like a great idea. There's a slight wrinkle to that idea--- there's a sidewalk between the property and mine that accesses the park behind us. So unfortunately even if I did own the lot next door it would be a separate lot, no just fencing it in as a huge yard, for example. If available cheap it would still be an attractive idea, however.... the separate lot issue could trip you up in another way, as in neighborhood covenants.

While building a workshop or a pool or etc on your large home lot isn't much a problem, having a lot without a home and trying to use it for some alternative use (think a large garage) is likely a violation of covenants concerning lot usage.

Then there's the issue of having a public right of way in the middle of your yard. Bah.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

I say buy the lot
sell your home and build a beter home on the larger lot.

reply to psafux

reply to iknow
Oklahoma has always had provisions where taxes with unpaid property taxes could be auctioned off eventually.

Code enforcement was largely toothless, and could fine, but of course the owners never would pay or often never could be found, and the properties would sit, and the other owners around them would be frustrated but little could be done, and the properties would lower home values, draw crime and squatters, etc etc

The city finally beefed up the laws, and now, after a process that takes several years, can finally take over abandoned homes. I really have no issue with that, as already I see the benefits. Everyone on the street is happy to see it go, I'm just sad at the waste of resources and the demolition of what was a nice home and could have been saved if a different path was taken.

It wasn't. I don't really blame the city.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

reply to KrK
I don't know the layout of the park etc. but I do wonder if you were to come into ownership of the land, if the city would let you trade the ROW for a new one on the 'far side' of the lot - in other words, give you back the 6' wide (or whatever) strip of land between the lots in exchange for a 6' wide strip at the edge of the empty lot, thus allowing you full usage of the lot.

Not sure what your plans are, but might be worth a discussion with the town if you're serious.

reply to KrK
You mentioned storm damage. Where you the one who was in the shower when a tornado came through? That storm damage?

reply to dennismurphy
I wondered that myself. It would be lot larger strip as it would have to dogleg around the new property. Also, I'm not sure the 3 homes on that side of that lot would like the access-way next to them. I don't like it next to me now. When I moved in here I thought it was cool but since learned I really don't like the traffic it brings---- my fence gets graffiti on it, litter and trash gets discarded there or even thrown over my fence..... People walk across my lawn and driveway taking "short cuts" to the park access, and bicyclists zoom across my driveway while I'm backing out from the garage--- guess what would happen if I hit one of them. It's a security problem, as well.... kind of reminds me of the old apartment days---- you live there, yet the public has access to your property. A lot of people are very inconsiderate these days.

I'd LOVE to just close off the access and make people go around to the park street but I'm sure the neighborhood would be pissed. I'd probably get sued and lose. :P

--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

reply to AVD

reply to jrs8084
Yeah, that was me. This house took some minor storm damage as well (the one that got demolished.)

The roof has some shingle damage, and in the one photo you can see where the guttering was ripped off by the winds above the garage etc. Also the fence was damaged on that property and trees were broken off in the backyard, but the city abatement crews cleaned that up when they did one of the clean ups at this house.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

reply to wth

If you think you want to stay in the area, buy the lot now. Build a bigger house when you save some money. Don't wait for the city to auction it. Dollars to donuts, they'll auction it off to their friends and it will be done before you even find out about it.

reply to KrK
Maybe you can buy the vacant lot on the cheap.

reply to KrK

reply to iknow

reply to KrK
The son was most certainly an idiot -- since for him it was 'free', he should've sold it for whatever he could've gotten for it since he appparently had no real intention to keep it. He could've just cut the price by 10% every month, and I'm fairly certain that he could've gotten all cash offers at 50% off.

As for the city, auctioning off would've been cheaper than demolishing it.
--
Wacky Races 2012!