By Emilie Rusch, Journal staff
The state’s largest city also has some of the harshest penalties for residents who refuse to keep their properties up to code.
Whether it is building problems or public nuisances, Code Enforcement has the ability to issue $100 civil citations if no effort to fix the problem occurs within 10 to 14 days, code enforcement officer Brad Hartmann said.
Fines ratchet up to $200 after the second 10 to 14 days of no action and to $300 after the third 10 to 14 days. After that, offenders can be ticketed $300 every day until the property is cleaned up.
“We work with people if they’re willing to work with us,” Hartmann said. “The fines are only automatic if they don’t do anything.”
Hartmann said most code enforcement is complaint-driven, but every spring, the city chooses two neighborhoods for proactive clean-up programs.
Residents in the specific areas can then leave any junk out at the curb — including tires, vehicle parts and appliances — for free pickup by street crews formed from volunteers from various city departments.
Afterwards, code enforcement officers survey the neighborhoods looking for any leftover violations that need to be addressed.
In April, Project Neighborhood Improvement/ Complaint Easement and Project Keep Environmental Enhancement Permanent removed 355 truckloads of rubble, eight loads of tires and eight loads of appliances from two neighborhoods, according to the city’s Web site.
“We can only enforce what city ordinance says,” Hartmann said. “Just because one person doesn’t like the color of the curtains, we can’t change that. But if there’s a complaint about a junk car, or the grass is over eight inches or they’re parking on their lawn — which is illegal in Sioux Falls — we investigate it.”
Bismarck: Clean-Up Week helpsThe North Dakota capital has found luck with a citywide junk collection program similar to that in Sioux Falls every spring and fall.
During Clean-Up Week, all city residents can leave whatever trash and junk they have on the curb for free pickup. The fall clean-up was Sept. 21-26, said Mel Fischer, administrator of the city’s Environmental Health Division. The division is part of the Bismarck
Fire Department.
“I drove by a house this morning and saw two complete PCs with four printers on the boulevard, waiting to be picked up, ready to go,” Fischer said. “There is a great awareness of the program.”
Before the spring clean-up, environmental health officers do an annual “spring survey,” a proactive pass through the city to identify and contact property owners about violations. Year-round, Environmental Health also works closely with the city Public Works Department, which acts as a second set of eyes when out doing normal garbage collection.
In the past four years, Bismarck has gained greater authority to deal with overgrown grass and weeds on residential and commercial properties, Fischer said. Neither can be longer than eight inches.
If property owners do not trim their grass by June 1, July 15 and Sept. 1 — the city’s “cut-by” dates — a city contractor will mow it without notifying residents first. This year, the minimum mowing cost is $74 — $64 per hour plus a $10 administrative fee.
The program, which has been generally well-received in the community, has freed the division’s limited staff to spend more time on other code violations, Fischer said.
“We used to get 1,500 calls a year or more. Then, we’d have to go out and verify the call and get a map ready, give it to a contractor, make sure the contractor cut it. Sometimes, it was four trips out to the parcel,” Fischer said.
“Our goal is just to have it done. If it’s done by someone else, that’s great. We’re not interested in making money in this.”
Monday, 12 October 2009
Saranac Lake plans to auction abandoned vehicles
By CHRIS KNIGHT, Enterprise Senior Staff Writer
SARANAC LAKE - The village is planning to auction 18 cars and trucks, more than a dozen of which were seized by the police department under the village's junk car law.
The date of the auction hasn't been set, but village mechanic Wayne Voudren is working with Blanchard's Auction Service in Potsdam to try and schedule it some- time in early October.
Five of the vehicles were village owned and have been replaced, Voudren said. The remaining 13 were abandoned throughout the village and seized by police.
Voudren said only two of the vehicles are in running condition.
"Most of them are junk," he said. "People just leave garbage in them and, for whatever reason, just walk away."
Saranac Lake Police Chief Bruce Nason said the 13 abandoned cars and trucks had been seized over the past year-and-a-half using the village's junk-car ordinance.
"The majority were done in 2008," he said. "We picked up another three or four in February when we cleaned out the municipal lot off Dorsey Street for snow removal. The others just trickle in."
If police spot a vehicle that has no license plates and isn't registered, an officer will try to make contact with the vehicle's owner or the property owner, Nason said. If that person can't be immediately located, a bright yellow tag is left on the vehicle asking the owner to contact police. If there's still no response, a certified letter is sent to the last known owner of the vehicle, giving him or her 10 days to respond. If no action is taken after 10 days, Nason said the vehicle will be towed to the village impound, located behind the sewer plant.
The owner of a tagged vehicle may also apply for a six-month storage permit if they're trying to repair or sell the vehicle. But if that six months goes by and no action is taken, the vehicle can be seized by the village.
Nason said police handle reports of potentially abandoned vehicles on a regular basis.
"It is ongoing," he said. "I think we've talked with at least three people in the last month about vehicles that were not licensed that we have not already tagged."
The village board agreed last week to sell both the abandoned vehicles as well as the five village-owned vehicles at auction. Mayor Tom Michael said the number of abandoned vehicles that will be put up for auction is a "testament to the police department's stepped-up patrols."
---
Contact Chris Knight at 891-2600 ext. 24 or cknight@adirondackdailyenterprise.com.
NEWS SOURCE
SARANAC LAKE - The village is planning to auction 18 cars and trucks, more than a dozen of which were seized by the police department under the village's junk car law.
The date of the auction hasn't been set, but village mechanic Wayne Voudren is working with Blanchard's Auction Service in Potsdam to try and schedule it some- time in early October.
Five of the vehicles were village owned and have been replaced, Voudren said. The remaining 13 were abandoned throughout the village and seized by police.
Voudren said only two of the vehicles are in running condition.
"Most of them are junk," he said. "People just leave garbage in them and, for whatever reason, just walk away."
Saranac Lake Police Chief Bruce Nason said the 13 abandoned cars and trucks had been seized over the past year-and-a-half using the village's junk-car ordinance.
"The majority were done in 2008," he said. "We picked up another three or four in February when we cleaned out the municipal lot off Dorsey Street for snow removal. The others just trickle in."
If police spot a vehicle that has no license plates and isn't registered, an officer will try to make contact with the vehicle's owner or the property owner, Nason said. If that person can't be immediately located, a bright yellow tag is left on the vehicle asking the owner to contact police. If there's still no response, a certified letter is sent to the last known owner of the vehicle, giving him or her 10 days to respond. If no action is taken after 10 days, Nason said the vehicle will be towed to the village impound, located behind the sewer plant.
The owner of a tagged vehicle may also apply for a six-month storage permit if they're trying to repair or sell the vehicle. But if that six months goes by and no action is taken, the vehicle can be seized by the village.
Nason said police handle reports of potentially abandoned vehicles on a regular basis.
"It is ongoing," he said. "I think we've talked with at least three people in the last month about vehicles that were not licensed that we have not already tagged."
The village board agreed last week to sell both the abandoned vehicles as well as the five village-owned vehicles at auction. Mayor Tom Michael said the number of abandoned vehicles that will be put up for auction is a "testament to the police department's stepped-up patrols."
---
Contact Chris Knight at 891-2600 ext. 24 or cknight@adirondackdailyenterprise.com.
NEWS SOURCE
Don't complain; be happy with Cash for Clunkers savings
By KEN MORRIS
Special to The Oakland Press
Just how successful was the Car Allowance Rebate System, otherwise known as Cash for Clunkers program? According to the official government Web site, it was wildly successful.
It claims that nearly 700,000 so-called clunkers were taken off the road and replaced by far more fuel-efficient vehicles. And that $2.877 billion worth of rebate applications were submitted prior to the final deadline, just under the $3 billion Congress allocated for the program.
Many dealers, on the other hand, were not so wildly thrilled. Their main complaint is that the government is way behind on the paperwork. They have not been anywhere near fully compensated in the timely manner they were expecting.
Then there are the consumers, specifically Michigan consumers. How do they feel? To my surprise, I’ve heard complaints from a number of program participants. They’re unhappy that they had to pay sales tax on the full purchase price.
Without question, a new car is a big-ticket item. That means big sales tax, and the state of Michigan coffers likely received a sizeable influx of tax revenue. In a state desperate for revenue, it clearly had to help.
So why complain when the sales tax paid was exactly the same that would have been paid if there were no CARS program? After all, our state tax code has remained consistent.
For example, if you privately sold a used car to an individual, the new purchaser pays tax on it. For a $5,000 used car with a 6 percent rate, the sales tax would be $300. If you traded in that same vehicle at the dealership and bought a new $30,000 car, you would pay sales tax on the entire amount. You don’t get to deduct $5,000.
Some states do let you deduct the value of the trade-in and just pay tax on the difference, but in Michigan it’s always been the full purchase price. You pay sales tax on the entire $30,000 even though there is a $5,000 trade-in.
When you crunch the numbers, the difference is not really all that great. Sales tax on $30,000 would be $1,800. With a maximum credit of $4,500, you’d pay taxes on $25,500, or $1,530. With a difference of just $270, I’m surprised that some Cash for Clunkers participants were disappointed. My personal belief is you should pay taxes on the full purchase price and be happy that you benefited from the program. Don’t find fault with it.
In this economic environment, there are a lot of financial issues to complain about. Having to pay sales tax on the full price of a vehicle shouldn’t be one of them.
The Cash for Clunkers program had a lot of winners, including eligible buyers, state coffers, and an ailing auto industry.
The only loser I see is a national debt that continues to climb at an alarming rate. Hopefully, vehicle sales will continue on their own merit without any tax stimulation. If you benefited from the program, by all means be thrilled and don’t complain.
Be thankful you don’t live in one of the states that collects income tax on the $4,500 credit and enjoy your new car.
Fax your questions to Ken Morris at 248-952-1848 or e-mail to ken.morris@investfinancial.com. Ken is a registered representative of INVEST Financial, member FINRA, SIPC and is Vice-President of the Society for Lifetime Planning in Troy.
NEWS SOURCE
Special to The Oakland Press
Just how successful was the Car Allowance Rebate System, otherwise known as Cash for Clunkers program? According to the official government Web site, it was wildly successful.
It claims that nearly 700,000 so-called clunkers were taken off the road and replaced by far more fuel-efficient vehicles. And that $2.877 billion worth of rebate applications were submitted prior to the final deadline, just under the $3 billion Congress allocated for the program.
Many dealers, on the other hand, were not so wildly thrilled. Their main complaint is that the government is way behind on the paperwork. They have not been anywhere near fully compensated in the timely manner they were expecting.
Then there are the consumers, specifically Michigan consumers. How do they feel? To my surprise, I’ve heard complaints from a number of program participants. They’re unhappy that they had to pay sales tax on the full purchase price.
Without question, a new car is a big-ticket item. That means big sales tax, and the state of Michigan coffers likely received a sizeable influx of tax revenue. In a state desperate for revenue, it clearly had to help.
So why complain when the sales tax paid was exactly the same that would have been paid if there were no CARS program? After all, our state tax code has remained consistent.
For example, if you privately sold a used car to an individual, the new purchaser pays tax on it. For a $5,000 used car with a 6 percent rate, the sales tax would be $300. If you traded in that same vehicle at the dealership and bought a new $30,000 car, you would pay sales tax on the entire amount. You don’t get to deduct $5,000.
Some states do let you deduct the value of the trade-in and just pay tax on the difference, but in Michigan it’s always been the full purchase price. You pay sales tax on the entire $30,000 even though there is a $5,000 trade-in.
When you crunch the numbers, the difference is not really all that great. Sales tax on $30,000 would be $1,800. With a maximum credit of $4,500, you’d pay taxes on $25,500, or $1,530. With a difference of just $270, I’m surprised that some Cash for Clunkers participants were disappointed. My personal belief is you should pay taxes on the full purchase price and be happy that you benefited from the program. Don’t find fault with it.
In this economic environment, there are a lot of financial issues to complain about. Having to pay sales tax on the full price of a vehicle shouldn’t be one of them.
The Cash for Clunkers program had a lot of winners, including eligible buyers, state coffers, and an ailing auto industry.
The only loser I see is a national debt that continues to climb at an alarming rate. Hopefully, vehicle sales will continue on their own merit without any tax stimulation. If you benefited from the program, by all means be thrilled and don’t complain.
Be thankful you don’t live in one of the states that collects income tax on the $4,500 credit and enjoy your new car.
Fax your questions to Ken Morris at 248-952-1848 or e-mail to ken.morris@investfinancial.com. Ken is a registered representative of INVEST Financial, member FINRA, SIPC and is Vice-President of the Society for Lifetime Planning in Troy.
NEWS SOURCE
Wednesday, 7 October 2009
Vardaman Passes Ban On Junk Cars
By LISA McNEECE
Vardaman Board of Aldermen unanimously agreed on a junk car ordinance for the town at the regular meeting of the board last night. The ordinance, which details requirements and fines associated with junk cars and junk yard violations, will be published in the next couple of weeks.
Also at the meeting the board agreed to several repairs for town-owned buildings on Main Street.
Aldermen agreed to pay P&R Aluminum's quote of $2,200 for repair of doors in the building on the east side of Main St. They also agreed to allow the Sweet Potato Committee to start using the building.
The board accepted the low bid of P&R of $1,725 for the replacement of an awning that blew away on the corner building. They added a stipulation that the work be completed before the Sweet Potato Festival November 7. The other bid submitted was from Dugard for $3,292.
The board also approved P&R's price of $175 to replace a broken window in the building Catholic Charities is using.
In another matter, the board granted a variance for Ted Panning to put in a gun repair shop adjacent to his house which is zoned residential. Panning said he planned to build a 12x20 wood–siding building for the businesss.
The board also approved:
•Clean up date for the town Saturday, Oct. 24.
•Setting a minimum age of 21 years old for volunteer firemen.
•Upgrades to the town's accounting computer software from BBI of $3,200.
•Raising part time city hall employee Maxine Blue's pay rate to minimum wage.
•Tabling a request from Laquanna Penson for a street light until next month.
Clerk Barbara Tedder reported to the board that Craig Williams' Farm had donated $471 to pay for spotlights at the Sportsplex.
The board ended the meeting in executive session with Terral Cooper, part time police officer. They accepted Cooper's resignation effective yesterday to pursue his BBQ business.
NEWS SOURCE
Vardaman Board of Aldermen unanimously agreed on a junk car ordinance for the town at the regular meeting of the board last night. The ordinance, which details requirements and fines associated with junk cars and junk yard violations, will be published in the next couple of weeks.
Also at the meeting the board agreed to several repairs for town-owned buildings on Main Street.
Aldermen agreed to pay P&R Aluminum's quote of $2,200 for repair of doors in the building on the east side of Main St. They also agreed to allow the Sweet Potato Committee to start using the building.
The board accepted the low bid of P&R of $1,725 for the replacement of an awning that blew away on the corner building. They added a stipulation that the work be completed before the Sweet Potato Festival November 7. The other bid submitted was from Dugard for $3,292.
The board also approved P&R's price of $175 to replace a broken window in the building Catholic Charities is using.
In another matter, the board granted a variance for Ted Panning to put in a gun repair shop adjacent to his house which is zoned residential. Panning said he planned to build a 12x20 wood–siding building for the businesss.
The board also approved:
•Clean up date for the town Saturday, Oct. 24.
•Setting a minimum age of 21 years old for volunteer firemen.
•Upgrades to the town's accounting computer software from BBI of $3,200.
•Raising part time city hall employee Maxine Blue's pay rate to minimum wage.
•Tabling a request from Laquanna Penson for a street light until next month.
Clerk Barbara Tedder reported to the board that Craig Williams' Farm had donated $471 to pay for spotlights at the Sportsplex.
The board ended the meeting in executive session with Terral Cooper, part time police officer. They accepted Cooper's resignation effective yesterday to pursue his BBQ business.
NEWS SOURCE
How Many Cars On Your Property?
By Jen Dunnaway
Editor-at-Large
I personally feel that yards festooned with junk cars are an important part of the American cultural landscape. I don’t necessarily mean stripped-out hulks up on cinder blocks, or rotting junk with the windshields caved in. But a residential property with a few serviceable project vehicles strewn around it always warms my heart–it says, this is a neighborhood where you can have a few cars and maybe even work on them in public without getting hassled by The Man. I’m looking at moving in the next few weeks, and seeing as it’s always easier to accumulate cars than to get rid of them, I can only hope I’ll be going someplace where the neighbors won’t mind me keeping a few extra vehicles around. So, just curious: how many rides do you keep at your place? And do you think you could get away with more?
Comments
Nismoke
Oct 7, 2009 at 9:18 am
I have a BPU 96′ supra TT,a custom nissan sunny n14,a starlet glanza v,toyota ist and a bored mitsubishi L200 pickup turbo
chevette-man
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:32 am
i have:
1985 chevette=garaged kept
1983 acadian=not running
1987 f-150=not running
1994 sunbird= not running
1996 civic=crashed
1990 astro=not running
1994 integra= daily driver
1985 atc250=runs sometimes
1983 atc200=junk
1970s sailboat with 5hp leaded gas outboard
and this is all on my property still
frostyking4lyf4
Oct 7, 2009 at 7:37 am
i have 5 in my yard 3 mine 2 parents
XTZTwinTurbo
Oct 7, 2009 at 12:20 am
Used to have just one, but now I’m repairing it.
ChevyS104Life
Oct 6, 2009 at 7:03 pm
I only have 2 S10s but wow , that guy really likes Geo Metros !
andydarko31
Oct 6, 2009 at 5:33 pm
2001 Pontiac Grand Prix GT-mine
1986 Ford F-150 XLT 2×4-Mine
1992 Ford Ranger XLT 2×4-Dads
2003 Dodge Intrepid ES-Moms
We have a small driveway. Can’t park side by side. So when it comes to getting the car in the front of the drive out it takes some shuffling.
TKTNUNEZ
Oct 6, 2009 at 4:08 pm
we got too many mine are 64 impala wagon ,65 chevy truck ,47 ford truck , 87 ford bronco ,92 cutlass cruiser wagon ,4 mazda miatas 2 for parts one project one for fun , rolled ford ranger , 76 toyota pick up ,86 mazda b200 pick up ,92 acura intergra , 82 mustang , 95 ford t-bird ,81 cadillac eldorado , just got rid of 98 cavalier ,,87 d-250 truck ,86 5th avenue , my uncles are 54 chevy pick up ,53 chevy truck ,78 chevy luv , 76 super beatle , and there about 10 cars that are custormers
NH_89
Oct 6, 2009 at 1:45 pm
2002 Acura 1.7EL (mom/mine I dive it 95%the time)
2003 Pontiac Bonneville SLE (Brother’s)
1997 Mercury Sable Wagon (Dad’s)
1986 Pontiac Acadian/Chevy Chevette 4 door 5-speed (mine)
soufigured86
Oct 6, 2009 at 11:29 am
well, i may not have many on my property (moms sunfire and a work truck) i just moved and had to store my vehicles t a buddys farm out of town, to sum it all up there is my 92 chev, my 77 cutlass, my old t bird, 3 iant lots, lets move on the the ones hes got, 27 older chev pickups, 19 ford pickups, 9 dodge pickups, 2 other cutlasses, a toranado, 59 impalla, 6 mustangs, 4 trans ams, one newer chevy pickup, 18 random gm cars, 7 random ford cars, 68 plymouth vip, 64 cornet, a pinto with a 460, 3 ramchargers, a d50, 5 pickups pre 55,and several others there are well over 100 vehicles there, most are junkers being stipped for parts, but many are running driving vehicles, and there are a couple over the top resto mods (cornet, pinto, vip and more) so thats quite a few cars, plus thats not counting the othere three lots, and the main one in calgary, the guy owns over 1500 cars, and atleast 100 of them are resto mods
BoltZ22
Oct 6, 2009 at 10:53 am
Not to long ago at my parents house (in town next door to a Credit Union parking lot), it was my parents 2 vans, my moms new Rav4, my brothers Silverado SS and Prelude, My Corsica & Cavalier, 2 Boats, and a snowmobile trailer.
RavenAegis45
Oct 6, 2009 at 10:30 am
Ive got a few projects and some cars just needing repairs. I recently came intoa 280Z with tons of problems but in good shape so far, but ive also got an Older 64 monster Ford Pick Up that runs but isnt really used. then theres a 2000 Taurus that needs a new tranny (Not an Easy task one bit), then a 82 Toyota Truck and ofcourse My Celica and my Moms 4Runner. Kind of Alot…. I think so lol
chevy1971
Oct 6, 2009 at 9:39 am
I don’t have as many cars as these guys in the blog but i have a small lot with a single garage and a small driveway. I have a 08 legacy, “08 saturn outlook, `01 subaru impreza, `03 chevy s10, `76 911 carrera s, and every weekend a `06 bmw 325i. my neighbors hate me and complain about the car taking up parking on the street. they call the cops on me for nothing, now the cops don’t even bother coming. One of my neighbors came up tome and told me to stop driving my Porsche at night because of the noise. i told her that i drive it to a car get together twice a week so that’s not going to be possible, she yielded and bitched at me so that night at 3;30 am i made sure to wake her up.
piston454
Oct 6, 2009 at 8:27 am
I think as long as the cars aren’t a major eye sore then it’s ok to have some on your property. I like having things neat and tidy so i say that if you have a few vehicles it’s ok when they’re arranged nice and there’s not a huge pile of junk parts around them.
I have a few vehicles myself… At one point i had a 1986 Ford Bronco 4×4, a 1993 GMC Jimmy 4×4, a 1989 GMC Sierra 2wd, and a 1998 VW Golf 2.0L. As i began to work more and some family moved home i realized that i didn’t have all the time i needed to keep my little fleet of vehicles going. I decided to purge a few. I got rid of the VW, the Jimmy, and the Bronco. I made my decision based on condition of the vehicle and sentimental value.
I also had another goal in mind at the time. I wanted to make room for a project that i wanted to take on with my father. I ended up buying a 1979 Internation Harvester Fire Truck from my town that i have a lot of history with. So now i pick away at it, little by little, and it sits where all the others once did. I find if you don’t make your yard look like the town dump but organize it instead, then you won’t be bothered. I do realize that i am in the country and it’s much easier to have a vehicle collection out there than in the city. Anyway, the moral of the story is to purge when you get in too deep and keep what you have looking as nice as possible. Good luck to all you project goers out there!
89RSCAMAROMAN
Oct 6, 2009 at 7:44 am
I told the wife that having all these cars around one day would pay off, and here is it thanks to cardomain LOL. we live in MTN HOME ARKANSAS We have a 87 jeep cherokee (3 inch lift, 305) 89 rs camaro, 02 trail blazer, 03 impala (replacing motor and interior) 92 chevy silverado, 1990 ford flatbed dually! oh and a 99 chrysler cirrus. I had a 95 650 honda cbr but i got rid of it. As far as the neighbors go they dont car and my one neighbor always ask if im starting a mechanic shop. also my other neighbor has a late 70 vette and early 70 cougar and late 90 accord and early 90 toyota and he also just got a flatbed dually and he has a late 80 chevy pickup. also as far as my town goes they havent said nothing yet!
gethomesolutions
Oct 6, 2009 at 2:28 am
““““““““““““
Sounds better
Sell House Fast
racins-10
Oct 5, 2009 at 8:48 pm
we have a bunch of cars 08 trailblazer ss, 08 trailblazer, 08 silverado, 06 monte carlo, 75 cordoba, 75 super beetle, 83 cherokee, 83 cj, 89 silverado, 83 trans am, 83 firebird, 84 and 82 camaro, 86 s-10, amc eagle, and a 91 blazer. nobodys complained yet
Screwed_Up_Tape
Oct 5, 2009 at 7:32 pm
I love this blog. Im from da nawf of houston. So everyone in my neighborhood has 3 or four cars upfront. We have a building so sum of our cars are inside. We have a 03 envoy, 05 tundra, 02 impala, 98 escort =P all upfront. Then we have a 67 lincoln, 73 cutlass s, 63 monterrey, and two harleys along wit sum lawnmowers in a building.
chevyman327nova
Oct 5, 2009 at 6:48 pm
i could go on and on but i dont feel like it right now
chevyman327nova
Oct 5, 2009 at 6:46 pm
fuck it there is never too many and people and the townships need to mind there own business trust me i know all about it i live at home still and gotta hear from the old man cuz my rides are the ones causing the problems and there just tryin to pretty shit up like a yuppie brady bunch neighborhood and not all of us want that and they gotta realize this is our life for some of us and those vehicles mite be worth money or have sentimental value or somethin and another reason would be we all cant afford a huge fancy garage to put them in but anyway this is just another thing we should ban together to put a stop to just let us enjoy our collection of cars because we can also get parts that way its cheaper they dont want us to do that though because they wouldnt make profit so fuck it
kingkevin420
Oct 5, 2009 at 6:26 pm
on a weekend, my girlfriends parents live in a subdivision and all of us kids always gather there, and on the weekends you will find a 03 audi A4 quattro 3.0L 6 speed, a 99 passat 2.8L, 99 jetta wolfsburg edition 1.8T, a 98 audi A4 2.8L, modified 97 jetta with a 2.0L turbo converted from deisel, 06 jetta TDI, 98 golf, and of course my lovely 89 bmw 325IX….so thats 8 cars surrounding a house that the driveway fits only 4 cars…no one has said anything
buickpimpin101
Oct 5, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Well Well Well, We have 10 vehicles at our house every night, and we could get away with more, as we on land out of town a bit, we have a 88 Chevy Beauville van, 65 Ford 250, 64 Buick Skylark, 86 mazda B-2000, 1987 Buick Skylark, 1984 dodge cube-van, 1948 ford F68 pick up, 2004 ford van, 1996 jeep Grand Gherokee, and a 1995 chrysler sebring, alot Huh!? Check out my garage! and i will return the favor! Good Article!
blownpony22
Oct 5, 2009 at 4:41 pm
we have an 06 impala, 08 t&c, 06 elantra,98 gsx, 01 mustang, 98 dakata, 99 mustang, 97 gs spyder, 01 s10, 04 pacifica, two bikes, 97 concord, two nova’s, trans am, 04 ram hemi, 08 hemi, 01 vette zo6, 04 rx8, all registered
misfitt1958
Oct 5, 2009 at 4:41 pm
well lets see at last count we have 12 / 3 we have payed for and not pick up yet…. heres what we got so far.. 1 88 gmc suburban/ 1 88 mazda kingcab/1 86 dodge 3/4 ton 4×4/ 1 83 ford f150 kingcab/ 1 84 chevy el cameno/ 1 82 chevy selvirado 4×4 1/2 ton/ 1 86 chevy low rider 1/2 ton / 2 84 totyota 4×4(1 parts trk)/ 1 79 dodge 4×4 3/4 ton (parts trk)/1 82 mercadies 300sd / 1 86 mercadies 500s/ and fixing to pick up a 85 mustang coup to put a 351w in/ and all the xtra parts for everthing pretty much fills the garage all these run but the two parts trks we are tring to find a small air plane hanger our something to store all of them for the winter
Alex Vickers
Oct 5, 2009 at 3:11 pm
There’s a 1994 Camaro V6 that wants to be a POS and not start (what can you expect out of a car that’s had the piss beaten out of it for the last decade?), that’s all that’s at my place.
-
But at my grandmother’s and my father’s place (they’re neighbors), there’s a 1973 Mercury Capri, two 1978 Mustang IIs, an early 80’s Civic, a 1987 Honda Prelude Si, a 1988 Honda Civic CRX (window louvers and a carb), my 1963 Volkswagen Beetle, a 1988 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale, a 1990 Honda Accord and a 1991 Honda Accord, a 2004 Hyunda Elantra (recently repoed), a 1999 Nissan Altima, a 2003 Chevrolet S-10, a 1978 Kawasaki KZ650-SR, and my old 1987 Ford F-150 that was recently towed away. Out of all of those, I think only five or six run, and only one is missing an engine. The others just need a lot of refreshing before they’d even turn over.
Nuvey
Oct 5, 2009 at 2:58 pm
I’ve got 14 cars.. And even more motorcycles.. Only three cars are registered though.. But no, I highly doubt I could get away with even one more car.. Even if the city didn’t freak again (Took 10yrs to convince them to leave us alone), I’ve still not got the room..
Pyrotechniques
Oct 5, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I saw that guy on my news channel last year!! He takes in, rebuilds, and restores the old geo’s because they get such good gas mileage, 60+ miles to the gallon I think?
StreetDemonzCC
Oct 5, 2009 at 1:53 pm
I live out in the country, but unfortunatly the couty law says only 1 unregistered vehicle around. So as of this moment there is my 2 RX-7’s, my Subaru, a Mistsu Mirage, and a Blazer. We had at one point about 6 cars in the driveway between 2 people. If I can find a great place with a yard, I will have tons of cars lol. We dont have a garage, and the driveway is mostly, some loose rock, and dirt lol, so working on the car here is hard to do when the raid washes away the driveway most the time.
1lowscort
Oct 5, 2009 at 10:57 am
I have two EXPs at my house, as well as my roommate’s Beetle and my other roommate’s Jetta. We had several more, but somebody called our landlord on us so we had to move a few.
FuryPaul
Oct 5, 2009 at 9:52 am
I’ve got four, all of which are tagged, insured and running. Two in the driveway (part of which is under a carport), two at the curb in front of the house.
One of my friends keeps telling me I should build a garage in the back yard, but (A) a two-car garage set the required distance from the property line would wipe out most of said yard, (B) including removal of at least two trees, (C) plus grading, buildup and paving, and (C) I don’t have an extra $25-30k lying around to build it.
PureBusiness
Oct 5, 2009 at 8:15 am
I’m healthy as a horse,but why burden the next generation with my crappy projects,besides;i already feel bad for storing a project for a friend that already looks hideous sitting in my driveway! nO,I’m not talking about my Truck either! haha
nissanchick860
Oct 5, 2009 at 8:12 am
My husband and I have 5 total, and we live in an apartment complex. Luckily we were able to rent two garages, so two are garaged and the other 3 are in the parking lot. Management is pretty relaxed so we haven’t had any problems with the number of vehicles we own, especially since we actually use our two garages for cars and not for storage of junk like nearly everyone else does.
When the time comes for a house, we’re definitely going to buy one with some property and room for a big shop where we can have a few lifts and what not so we’re not restricted on space for our cars and projects!
sarahsmile90
Oct 5, 2009 at 6:09 am
My two cars never make it into the garage and that is frowned upon in my neighborhood….
improbcat
Oct 5, 2009 at 4:40 am
I have my xB, and my ‘62 Comet lives in the garage, also there is whichever of my girlfriends cars (Saturn or MR2) she isn’t driving that week. Then each of my housemates has a car.
I doubt I could get away with more as that pretty much fills the driveway. I just had to cram my ‘62 Scotty trailer in the garage after a nasty letter from my town’s zoning enforcement.
I’m also limited in that my lease is up in April and I will almost definitely moving somewhere else with my girlfriend. Between us we have four cars & a camper trailer which will make finding a new place hell. More cars (especially parts cars) would only make it worse.
NEWS SOURCE
Editor-at-Large
I personally feel that yards festooned with junk cars are an important part of the American cultural landscape. I don’t necessarily mean stripped-out hulks up on cinder blocks, or rotting junk with the windshields caved in. But a residential property with a few serviceable project vehicles strewn around it always warms my heart–it says, this is a neighborhood where you can have a few cars and maybe even work on them in public without getting hassled by The Man. I’m looking at moving in the next few weeks, and seeing as it’s always easier to accumulate cars than to get rid of them, I can only hope I’ll be going someplace where the neighbors won’t mind me keeping a few extra vehicles around. So, just curious: how many rides do you keep at your place? And do you think you could get away with more?
Comments
Nismoke
Oct 7, 2009 at 9:18 am
I have a BPU 96′ supra TT,a custom nissan sunny n14,a starlet glanza v,toyota ist and a bored mitsubishi L200 pickup turbo
chevette-man
Oct 7, 2009 at 8:32 am
i have:
1985 chevette=garaged kept
1983 acadian=not running
1987 f-150=not running
1994 sunbird= not running
1996 civic=crashed
1990 astro=not running
1994 integra= daily driver
1985 atc250=runs sometimes
1983 atc200=junk
1970s sailboat with 5hp leaded gas outboard
and this is all on my property still
frostyking4lyf4
Oct 7, 2009 at 7:37 am
i have 5 in my yard 3 mine 2 parents
XTZTwinTurbo
Oct 7, 2009 at 12:20 am
Used to have just one, but now I’m repairing it.
ChevyS104Life
Oct 6, 2009 at 7:03 pm
I only have 2 S10s but wow , that guy really likes Geo Metros !
andydarko31
Oct 6, 2009 at 5:33 pm
2001 Pontiac Grand Prix GT-mine
1986 Ford F-150 XLT 2×4-Mine
1992 Ford Ranger XLT 2×4-Dads
2003 Dodge Intrepid ES-Moms
We have a small driveway. Can’t park side by side. So when it comes to getting the car in the front of the drive out it takes some shuffling.
TKTNUNEZ
Oct 6, 2009 at 4:08 pm
we got too many mine are 64 impala wagon ,65 chevy truck ,47 ford truck , 87 ford bronco ,92 cutlass cruiser wagon ,4 mazda miatas 2 for parts one project one for fun , rolled ford ranger , 76 toyota pick up ,86 mazda b200 pick up ,92 acura intergra , 82 mustang , 95 ford t-bird ,81 cadillac eldorado , just got rid of 98 cavalier ,,87 d-250 truck ,86 5th avenue , my uncles are 54 chevy pick up ,53 chevy truck ,78 chevy luv , 76 super beatle , and there about 10 cars that are custormers
NH_89
Oct 6, 2009 at 1:45 pm
2002 Acura 1.7EL (mom/mine I dive it 95%the time)
2003 Pontiac Bonneville SLE (Brother’s)
1997 Mercury Sable Wagon (Dad’s)
1986 Pontiac Acadian/Chevy Chevette 4 door 5-speed (mine)
soufigured86
Oct 6, 2009 at 11:29 am
well, i may not have many on my property (moms sunfire and a work truck) i just moved and had to store my vehicles t a buddys farm out of town, to sum it all up there is my 92 chev, my 77 cutlass, my old t bird, 3 iant lots, lets move on the the ones hes got, 27 older chev pickups, 19 ford pickups, 9 dodge pickups, 2 other cutlasses, a toranado, 59 impalla, 6 mustangs, 4 trans ams, one newer chevy pickup, 18 random gm cars, 7 random ford cars, 68 plymouth vip, 64 cornet, a pinto with a 460, 3 ramchargers, a d50, 5 pickups pre 55,and several others there are well over 100 vehicles there, most are junkers being stipped for parts, but many are running driving vehicles, and there are a couple over the top resto mods (cornet, pinto, vip and more) so thats quite a few cars, plus thats not counting the othere three lots, and the main one in calgary, the guy owns over 1500 cars, and atleast 100 of them are resto mods
BoltZ22
Oct 6, 2009 at 10:53 am
Not to long ago at my parents house (in town next door to a Credit Union parking lot), it was my parents 2 vans, my moms new Rav4, my brothers Silverado SS and Prelude, My Corsica & Cavalier, 2 Boats, and a snowmobile trailer.
RavenAegis45
Oct 6, 2009 at 10:30 am
Ive got a few projects and some cars just needing repairs. I recently came intoa 280Z with tons of problems but in good shape so far, but ive also got an Older 64 monster Ford Pick Up that runs but isnt really used. then theres a 2000 Taurus that needs a new tranny (Not an Easy task one bit), then a 82 Toyota Truck and ofcourse My Celica and my Moms 4Runner. Kind of Alot…. I think so lol
chevy1971
Oct 6, 2009 at 9:39 am
I don’t have as many cars as these guys in the blog but i have a small lot with a single garage and a small driveway. I have a 08 legacy, “08 saturn outlook, `01 subaru impreza, `03 chevy s10, `76 911 carrera s, and every weekend a `06 bmw 325i. my neighbors hate me and complain about the car taking up parking on the street. they call the cops on me for nothing, now the cops don’t even bother coming. One of my neighbors came up tome and told me to stop driving my Porsche at night because of the noise. i told her that i drive it to a car get together twice a week so that’s not going to be possible, she yielded and bitched at me so that night at 3;30 am i made sure to wake her up.
piston454
Oct 6, 2009 at 8:27 am
I think as long as the cars aren’t a major eye sore then it’s ok to have some on your property. I like having things neat and tidy so i say that if you have a few vehicles it’s ok when they’re arranged nice and there’s not a huge pile of junk parts around them.
I have a few vehicles myself… At one point i had a 1986 Ford Bronco 4×4, a 1993 GMC Jimmy 4×4, a 1989 GMC Sierra 2wd, and a 1998 VW Golf 2.0L. As i began to work more and some family moved home i realized that i didn’t have all the time i needed to keep my little fleet of vehicles going. I decided to purge a few. I got rid of the VW, the Jimmy, and the Bronco. I made my decision based on condition of the vehicle and sentimental value.
I also had another goal in mind at the time. I wanted to make room for a project that i wanted to take on with my father. I ended up buying a 1979 Internation Harvester Fire Truck from my town that i have a lot of history with. So now i pick away at it, little by little, and it sits where all the others once did. I find if you don’t make your yard look like the town dump but organize it instead, then you won’t be bothered. I do realize that i am in the country and it’s much easier to have a vehicle collection out there than in the city. Anyway, the moral of the story is to purge when you get in too deep and keep what you have looking as nice as possible. Good luck to all you project goers out there!
89RSCAMAROMAN
Oct 6, 2009 at 7:44 am
I told the wife that having all these cars around one day would pay off, and here is it thanks to cardomain LOL. we live in MTN HOME ARKANSAS We have a 87 jeep cherokee (3 inch lift, 305) 89 rs camaro, 02 trail blazer, 03 impala (replacing motor and interior) 92 chevy silverado, 1990 ford flatbed dually! oh and a 99 chrysler cirrus. I had a 95 650 honda cbr but i got rid of it. As far as the neighbors go they dont car and my one neighbor always ask if im starting a mechanic shop. also my other neighbor has a late 70 vette and early 70 cougar and late 90 accord and early 90 toyota and he also just got a flatbed dually and he has a late 80 chevy pickup. also as far as my town goes they havent said nothing yet!
gethomesolutions
Oct 6, 2009 at 2:28 am
““““““““““““
Sounds better
Sell House Fast
racins-10
Oct 5, 2009 at 8:48 pm
we have a bunch of cars 08 trailblazer ss, 08 trailblazer, 08 silverado, 06 monte carlo, 75 cordoba, 75 super beetle, 83 cherokee, 83 cj, 89 silverado, 83 trans am, 83 firebird, 84 and 82 camaro, 86 s-10, amc eagle, and a 91 blazer. nobodys complained yet
Screwed_Up_Tape
Oct 5, 2009 at 7:32 pm
I love this blog. Im from da nawf of houston. So everyone in my neighborhood has 3 or four cars upfront. We have a building so sum of our cars are inside. We have a 03 envoy, 05 tundra, 02 impala, 98 escort =P all upfront. Then we have a 67 lincoln, 73 cutlass s, 63 monterrey, and two harleys along wit sum lawnmowers in a building.
chevyman327nova
Oct 5, 2009 at 6:48 pm
i could go on and on but i dont feel like it right now
chevyman327nova
Oct 5, 2009 at 6:46 pm
fuck it there is never too many and people and the townships need to mind there own business trust me i know all about it i live at home still and gotta hear from the old man cuz my rides are the ones causing the problems and there just tryin to pretty shit up like a yuppie brady bunch neighborhood and not all of us want that and they gotta realize this is our life for some of us and those vehicles mite be worth money or have sentimental value or somethin and another reason would be we all cant afford a huge fancy garage to put them in but anyway this is just another thing we should ban together to put a stop to just let us enjoy our collection of cars because we can also get parts that way its cheaper they dont want us to do that though because they wouldnt make profit so fuck it
kingkevin420
Oct 5, 2009 at 6:26 pm
on a weekend, my girlfriends parents live in a subdivision and all of us kids always gather there, and on the weekends you will find a 03 audi A4 quattro 3.0L 6 speed, a 99 passat 2.8L, 99 jetta wolfsburg edition 1.8T, a 98 audi A4 2.8L, modified 97 jetta with a 2.0L turbo converted from deisel, 06 jetta TDI, 98 golf, and of course my lovely 89 bmw 325IX….so thats 8 cars surrounding a house that the driveway fits only 4 cars…no one has said anything
buickpimpin101
Oct 5, 2009 at 5:42 pm
Well Well Well, We have 10 vehicles at our house every night, and we could get away with more, as we on land out of town a bit, we have a 88 Chevy Beauville van, 65 Ford 250, 64 Buick Skylark, 86 mazda B-2000, 1987 Buick Skylark, 1984 dodge cube-van, 1948 ford F68 pick up, 2004 ford van, 1996 jeep Grand Gherokee, and a 1995 chrysler sebring, alot Huh!? Check out my garage! and i will return the favor! Good Article!
blownpony22
Oct 5, 2009 at 4:41 pm
we have an 06 impala, 08 t&c, 06 elantra,98 gsx, 01 mustang, 98 dakata, 99 mustang, 97 gs spyder, 01 s10, 04 pacifica, two bikes, 97 concord, two nova’s, trans am, 04 ram hemi, 08 hemi, 01 vette zo6, 04 rx8, all registered
misfitt1958
Oct 5, 2009 at 4:41 pm
well lets see at last count we have 12 / 3 we have payed for and not pick up yet…. heres what we got so far.. 1 88 gmc suburban/ 1 88 mazda kingcab/1 86 dodge 3/4 ton 4×4/ 1 83 ford f150 kingcab/ 1 84 chevy el cameno/ 1 82 chevy selvirado 4×4 1/2 ton/ 1 86 chevy low rider 1/2 ton / 2 84 totyota 4×4(1 parts trk)/ 1 79 dodge 4×4 3/4 ton (parts trk)/1 82 mercadies 300sd / 1 86 mercadies 500s/ and fixing to pick up a 85 mustang coup to put a 351w in/ and all the xtra parts for everthing pretty much fills the garage all these run but the two parts trks we are tring to find a small air plane hanger our something to store all of them for the winter
Alex Vickers
Oct 5, 2009 at 3:11 pm
There’s a 1994 Camaro V6 that wants to be a POS and not start (what can you expect out of a car that’s had the piss beaten out of it for the last decade?), that’s all that’s at my place.
-
But at my grandmother’s and my father’s place (they’re neighbors), there’s a 1973 Mercury Capri, two 1978 Mustang IIs, an early 80’s Civic, a 1987 Honda Prelude Si, a 1988 Honda Civic CRX (window louvers and a carb), my 1963 Volkswagen Beetle, a 1988 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royale, a 1990 Honda Accord and a 1991 Honda Accord, a 2004 Hyunda Elantra (recently repoed), a 1999 Nissan Altima, a 2003 Chevrolet S-10, a 1978 Kawasaki KZ650-SR, and my old 1987 Ford F-150 that was recently towed away. Out of all of those, I think only five or six run, and only one is missing an engine. The others just need a lot of refreshing before they’d even turn over.
Nuvey
Oct 5, 2009 at 2:58 pm
I’ve got 14 cars.. And even more motorcycles.. Only three cars are registered though.. But no, I highly doubt I could get away with even one more car.. Even if the city didn’t freak again (Took 10yrs to convince them to leave us alone), I’ve still not got the room..
Pyrotechniques
Oct 5, 2009 at 2:43 pm
I saw that guy on my news channel last year!! He takes in, rebuilds, and restores the old geo’s because they get such good gas mileage, 60+ miles to the gallon I think?
StreetDemonzCC
Oct 5, 2009 at 1:53 pm
I live out in the country, but unfortunatly the couty law says only 1 unregistered vehicle around. So as of this moment there is my 2 RX-7’s, my Subaru, a Mistsu Mirage, and a Blazer. We had at one point about 6 cars in the driveway between 2 people. If I can find a great place with a yard, I will have tons of cars lol. We dont have a garage, and the driveway is mostly, some loose rock, and dirt lol, so working on the car here is hard to do when the raid washes away the driveway most the time.
1lowscort
Oct 5, 2009 at 10:57 am
I have two EXPs at my house, as well as my roommate’s Beetle and my other roommate’s Jetta. We had several more, but somebody called our landlord on us so we had to move a few.
FuryPaul
Oct 5, 2009 at 9:52 am
I’ve got four, all of which are tagged, insured and running. Two in the driveway (part of which is under a carport), two at the curb in front of the house.
One of my friends keeps telling me I should build a garage in the back yard, but (A) a two-car garage set the required distance from the property line would wipe out most of said yard, (B) including removal of at least two trees, (C) plus grading, buildup and paving, and (C) I don’t have an extra $25-30k lying around to build it.
PureBusiness
Oct 5, 2009 at 8:15 am
I’m healthy as a horse,but why burden the next generation with my crappy projects,besides;i already feel bad for storing a project for a friend that already looks hideous sitting in my driveway! nO,I’m not talking about my Truck either! haha
nissanchick860
Oct 5, 2009 at 8:12 am
My husband and I have 5 total, and we live in an apartment complex. Luckily we were able to rent two garages, so two are garaged and the other 3 are in the parking lot. Management is pretty relaxed so we haven’t had any problems with the number of vehicles we own, especially since we actually use our two garages for cars and not for storage of junk like nearly everyone else does.
When the time comes for a house, we’re definitely going to buy one with some property and room for a big shop where we can have a few lifts and what not so we’re not restricted on space for our cars and projects!
sarahsmile90
Oct 5, 2009 at 6:09 am
My two cars never make it into the garage and that is frowned upon in my neighborhood….
improbcat
Oct 5, 2009 at 4:40 am
I have my xB, and my ‘62 Comet lives in the garage, also there is whichever of my girlfriends cars (Saturn or MR2) she isn’t driving that week. Then each of my housemates has a car.
I doubt I could get away with more as that pretty much fills the driveway. I just had to cram my ‘62 Scotty trailer in the garage after a nasty letter from my town’s zoning enforcement.
I’m also limited in that my lease is up in April and I will almost definitely moving somewhere else with my girlfriend. Between us we have four cars & a camper trailer which will make finding a new place hell. More cars (especially parts cars) would only make it worse.
NEWS SOURCE
Unsightly properties: Officials address problems with enforcing ordinances
By Emilie Rusch, Journal staff
Driving down the alleys of North Rapid, Dale Schumacher can only sigh.
Junk cars, their driving days behind them, grow slowly into grass. Boats run aground far from shore. Abandoned appliances, old tires, piles of building materials, weeds and grass in jungle-like proportion — they’re all there.
And shouldn’t be, according to city ordinance.
“It just gets worse every day,” the longtime North Rapid resident said. “It degrades a neighborhood to the point where it’s a cancer.”
The city’s enforcement of public nuisance codes — the rules that prohibit junk and junk cars, tall weeds and snowy sidewalks on public and private property — has long been a sore spot for Rapid City residents. It’s not just a North Rapid problem, either.
Rapid City’s three code enforcement officers respond to thousands of complaints every year — 2,225 by Sept. 16 this year — from residents citywide, pointing out dead trees, unlicensed vehicles and other possible code violations. Some residents would say officers should be doing even more.
But code enforcement is a touchy line of work, requiring balance and a case-by-case approach, Community Resources Director Kevin Thom said.
A set of proposed changes, scheduled for a final council vote Monday, could make that work easier, especially when it comes to repeat offenders who let the junk pile or grass grow over and over again.
City officials — and even Schumacher — are optimistic the changes, including the possibility of fines for frequent violators, will meet the challenge.
“It’s our obligation to ensure we have safe, clean neighborhoods, but if you have one property owner who devalues the entire neighborhood because of his lack of maintenance, quite honestly, it’s damaging the neighbors,” Mayor Alan Hanks said. “They should be able to look to the city to step up and say: ‘We’re abiding by the rules. We maintain our properties. But here we have this neighbor that’s not willing to do the same.’”
Changes to code
Chief among the changes is the citation, which City Attorney Jason Green said was modeled off the uniform traffic citation.
Seventh Circuit Court Presiding Judge Jeff Davis will set the bond schedule for the tickets; Thom expects it will be about $80, including court costs. Police officers — not code enforcement officers — could issue the tickets to property owners or tenants.
Ordinance changes would also shorten the window those chronic offenders have to clean up a violation before abatement.
When property owners take no action, the city has the legal authority to abate code violations — whether it be mowing grass or hauling off junk — and then assess the cost back to the owner.
Under current ordinance, property owners have the same amount of time to fix problems regardless of how many times they’ve been contacted about the issue.
The change would give repeat offenders three days to clean up junk or long grass, instead of the regular 14 and 10 days, respectively.
“It’s not like we’re going to run out and start writing citations when the grass is nine inches tall instead of eight inches, out there with a ruler measuring it,” Thom said. “But it does give us the ability if there is somebody who just won’t comply, we have the tools we need. If you get a ticket every day for your violation, you’re probably more inclined to get it cleaned up.”
Tom Kurtenbach and Andy Chlebek, two of the city’s code enforcement officers, hope that is the case. They’ve already made mental note of a few tickets they want written as soon as Davis sets the fine schedule.
On typical complaints, officers respond first by going out to investigate and trying to make contact with the property owner. They explain the code violation and try to come to a voluntary solution.
“Some of the people are so down and out, they just don’t know where to go, and they start opening up,” Kurtenbach said.
“We deal with it on a case-by-case basis,” Chlebek said. “Somebody who has extenuating circumstances — they’re older, they don’t have the funds — we’ll give them time. We’ll work with them. But ultimately, the issue needs to be resolved.”
Most of the time, officers get voluntary compliance, but not every complaint resolves itself so simply, Thom said.
“You can have one case where you go out and talk to a person and they comply. Fine, you’re done with it. But you can have one case where you go back 10, 15 times and have contact with the person,” Thom said. “It’s not as simple as going out and noticing them, and then it’s cleaned up, and it’s done and you go on to the next one.”
Some property owners who won’t mow or clean up junk can require multiple visits — or abatements — every year.
In the worst cases, abatement is really just a temporary fix, Kurtenbach said as he looked out over one such home on North Street. That day — the day he served another 14-day notice of abatement — cars, bikes and a boat were among the debris strewn in the yard.
“We start over every time,” Kurtenbach said.
Plus, abatements aren’t a particularly expedient way to get things done. Officers must mail or hand-deliver official notices and then wait the 10 to 14 days before moving in. In the case of junk vehicles, residents also have the right of appeal.
“We’ve never had the appropriate methods to get compliance other than the abatement process that takes so long,” Hanks said. “If you abate someone’s property because they’ve not mowed their yard, it takes a month and a half to fix it. That’s silly.”
It’s not just North Rapid with problems, either. The city’s three officers each cover one section of town (Kurtenbach has the north side, Chlebek covers west of Interstate 190, and Jim Martz handles the southeast side), and they all stay plenty busy.
Just in the past few weeks, Chlebek issued an abatement notice on the new condominiums in Founders Park, where developers have left piles of loose debris and the grass to grow wild.
What can differ, though, are residents’ expectations of what is and is not acceptable behavior. On the west side, for example, folks are more apt to call code enforcement immediately, Chlebek said.
“That’s a key word: expectations,” Kurtenbach said. “Some folks’ expectations actually exceed what the ordinance reads. We can only bring properties up to compliance with the ordinance.”
“We can take things away. We don’t put things back,” Chlebek said. “We’re not going to tell you plant flowers, but we’ll make sure you cut down your grass and weeds and take the junk out of your yard.”
Both are confident, though, the ordinance changes and citations will go far in making their job a little easier. A new courtesy notice door hanger should help, too. The bright yellow cards notify property owners of violations and explain the relevant public nuisance codes without being confrontational.
The goal, ultimately, is “curbside compliance,” Thom said.
“There are some people in the community that think we should do even more code enforcement than we are, but there’s a balance between working with people, as opposed to being heavy-handed,” Thom said.
“Law enforcement has that same balance. You could sit out on the street corner and write every single person the minute you see every
violation, and you’d probably have an outcry from the community about heavy-handed law enforcement.”
City council supportThe mayor and council are, by and large, behind the changes. Aldermen already unanimously approved a resolution lifting an eight-hour-a-week cap on proactive enforcement.
What the ordinance changes and citations will do, Alderman Ron Kroeger said, is put pressure on the property owners who need it most: chronic offenders.
In his 12 years representing North Rapid, Kroeger has received his share of calls from residents with code enforcement complaints, many regarding the same properties.
“As it stands today, there are a lot of repeat offenders that know the system. They milk it to the very end,” Kroeger said. “This certainly will help solve that problem ... instead of letting them go back to the previous condition and wait for someone to send them a letter, and on and on and on.”
“It doesn’t cost money to keep junk cars out of your yard or mow your yard, the things that everyone should have the responsibility of doing.”
Alderman Aaron Costello, who worked with city staff on the changes, said cleaning up can be a tough sell to property owners. But if the city is serious about proactive enforcement, it’ll be education, not tickets, that make the difference.
“The only way to be proactive is to educate people before they’re in violation,” Costello said. “It’s almost a misnomer if you use ‘proactive’ and ‘enforcement’ in talking about these ordinances. It really falls back on the education part.”
Hanks said in an ideal world, they’d never write a single code enforcement ticket.
“We believe we can get 90 to 95 percent in
compliance just by letting them know and educating them of their responsibilities,” Hanks said. “It’s the five percent that are chronic violators that have a disregard for the impact they’re having on their neighborhood.”
And it’s that five percent that gets Schumacher so riled up as he drives through his neighborhood. He can’t wait for $80 tickets to start reaching repeat offenders’ pocketbooks.
“We need to put some teeth in code enforcement,” Schumacher said. “It’s been a long time coming.”
Contact Emilie Rusch at 394-8453 or emilie.rusch@rapidcityjournal.com.
NEWS SOURCE
Driving down the alleys of North Rapid, Dale Schumacher can only sigh.
Junk cars, their driving days behind them, grow slowly into grass. Boats run aground far from shore. Abandoned appliances, old tires, piles of building materials, weeds and grass in jungle-like proportion — they’re all there.
And shouldn’t be, according to city ordinance.
“It just gets worse every day,” the longtime North Rapid resident said. “It degrades a neighborhood to the point where it’s a cancer.”
The city’s enforcement of public nuisance codes — the rules that prohibit junk and junk cars, tall weeds and snowy sidewalks on public and private property — has long been a sore spot for Rapid City residents. It’s not just a North Rapid problem, either.
Rapid City’s three code enforcement officers respond to thousands of complaints every year — 2,225 by Sept. 16 this year — from residents citywide, pointing out dead trees, unlicensed vehicles and other possible code violations. Some residents would say officers should be doing even more.
But code enforcement is a touchy line of work, requiring balance and a case-by-case approach, Community Resources Director Kevin Thom said.
A set of proposed changes, scheduled for a final council vote Monday, could make that work easier, especially when it comes to repeat offenders who let the junk pile or grass grow over and over again.
City officials — and even Schumacher — are optimistic the changes, including the possibility of fines for frequent violators, will meet the challenge.
“It’s our obligation to ensure we have safe, clean neighborhoods, but if you have one property owner who devalues the entire neighborhood because of his lack of maintenance, quite honestly, it’s damaging the neighbors,” Mayor Alan Hanks said. “They should be able to look to the city to step up and say: ‘We’re abiding by the rules. We maintain our properties. But here we have this neighbor that’s not willing to do the same.’”
Changes to code
Chief among the changes is the citation, which City Attorney Jason Green said was modeled off the uniform traffic citation.
Seventh Circuit Court Presiding Judge Jeff Davis will set the bond schedule for the tickets; Thom expects it will be about $80, including court costs. Police officers — not code enforcement officers — could issue the tickets to property owners or tenants.
Ordinance changes would also shorten the window those chronic offenders have to clean up a violation before abatement.
When property owners take no action, the city has the legal authority to abate code violations — whether it be mowing grass or hauling off junk — and then assess the cost back to the owner.
Under current ordinance, property owners have the same amount of time to fix problems regardless of how many times they’ve been contacted about the issue.
The change would give repeat offenders three days to clean up junk or long grass, instead of the regular 14 and 10 days, respectively.
“It’s not like we’re going to run out and start writing citations when the grass is nine inches tall instead of eight inches, out there with a ruler measuring it,” Thom said. “But it does give us the ability if there is somebody who just won’t comply, we have the tools we need. If you get a ticket every day for your violation, you’re probably more inclined to get it cleaned up.”
Tom Kurtenbach and Andy Chlebek, two of the city’s code enforcement officers, hope that is the case. They’ve already made mental note of a few tickets they want written as soon as Davis sets the fine schedule.
On typical complaints, officers respond first by going out to investigate and trying to make contact with the property owner. They explain the code violation and try to come to a voluntary solution.
“Some of the people are so down and out, they just don’t know where to go, and they start opening up,” Kurtenbach said.
“We deal with it on a case-by-case basis,” Chlebek said. “Somebody who has extenuating circumstances — they’re older, they don’t have the funds — we’ll give them time. We’ll work with them. But ultimately, the issue needs to be resolved.”
Most of the time, officers get voluntary compliance, but not every complaint resolves itself so simply, Thom said.
“You can have one case where you go out and talk to a person and they comply. Fine, you’re done with it. But you can have one case where you go back 10, 15 times and have contact with the person,” Thom said. “It’s not as simple as going out and noticing them, and then it’s cleaned up, and it’s done and you go on to the next one.”
Some property owners who won’t mow or clean up junk can require multiple visits — or abatements — every year.
In the worst cases, abatement is really just a temporary fix, Kurtenbach said as he looked out over one such home on North Street. That day — the day he served another 14-day notice of abatement — cars, bikes and a boat were among the debris strewn in the yard.
“We start over every time,” Kurtenbach said.
Plus, abatements aren’t a particularly expedient way to get things done. Officers must mail or hand-deliver official notices and then wait the 10 to 14 days before moving in. In the case of junk vehicles, residents also have the right of appeal.
“We’ve never had the appropriate methods to get compliance other than the abatement process that takes so long,” Hanks said. “If you abate someone’s property because they’ve not mowed their yard, it takes a month and a half to fix it. That’s silly.”
It’s not just North Rapid with problems, either. The city’s three officers each cover one section of town (Kurtenbach has the north side, Chlebek covers west of Interstate 190, and Jim Martz handles the southeast side), and they all stay plenty busy.
Just in the past few weeks, Chlebek issued an abatement notice on the new condominiums in Founders Park, where developers have left piles of loose debris and the grass to grow wild.
What can differ, though, are residents’ expectations of what is and is not acceptable behavior. On the west side, for example, folks are more apt to call code enforcement immediately, Chlebek said.
“That’s a key word: expectations,” Kurtenbach said. “Some folks’ expectations actually exceed what the ordinance reads. We can only bring properties up to compliance with the ordinance.”
“We can take things away. We don’t put things back,” Chlebek said. “We’re not going to tell you plant flowers, but we’ll make sure you cut down your grass and weeds and take the junk out of your yard.”
Both are confident, though, the ordinance changes and citations will go far in making their job a little easier. A new courtesy notice door hanger should help, too. The bright yellow cards notify property owners of violations and explain the relevant public nuisance codes without being confrontational.
The goal, ultimately, is “curbside compliance,” Thom said.
“There are some people in the community that think we should do even more code enforcement than we are, but there’s a balance between working with people, as opposed to being heavy-handed,” Thom said.
“Law enforcement has that same balance. You could sit out on the street corner and write every single person the minute you see every
violation, and you’d probably have an outcry from the community about heavy-handed law enforcement.”
City council supportThe mayor and council are, by and large, behind the changes. Aldermen already unanimously approved a resolution lifting an eight-hour-a-week cap on proactive enforcement.
What the ordinance changes and citations will do, Alderman Ron Kroeger said, is put pressure on the property owners who need it most: chronic offenders.
In his 12 years representing North Rapid, Kroeger has received his share of calls from residents with code enforcement complaints, many regarding the same properties.
“As it stands today, there are a lot of repeat offenders that know the system. They milk it to the very end,” Kroeger said. “This certainly will help solve that problem ... instead of letting them go back to the previous condition and wait for someone to send them a letter, and on and on and on.”
“It doesn’t cost money to keep junk cars out of your yard or mow your yard, the things that everyone should have the responsibility of doing.”
Alderman Aaron Costello, who worked with city staff on the changes, said cleaning up can be a tough sell to property owners. But if the city is serious about proactive enforcement, it’ll be education, not tickets, that make the difference.
“The only way to be proactive is to educate people before they’re in violation,” Costello said. “It’s almost a misnomer if you use ‘proactive’ and ‘enforcement’ in talking about these ordinances. It really falls back on the education part.”
Hanks said in an ideal world, they’d never write a single code enforcement ticket.
“We believe we can get 90 to 95 percent in
compliance just by letting them know and educating them of their responsibilities,” Hanks said. “It’s the five percent that are chronic violators that have a disregard for the impact they’re having on their neighborhood.”
And it’s that five percent that gets Schumacher so riled up as he drives through his neighborhood. He can’t wait for $80 tickets to start reaching repeat offenders’ pocketbooks.
“We need to put some teeth in code enforcement,” Schumacher said. “It’s been a long time coming.”
Contact Emilie Rusch at 394-8453 or emilie.rusch@rapidcityjournal.com.
NEWS SOURCE
Clunkers in Practice
One of Washington's all-time dumb ideas.
Remember "cash for clunkers," the program that subsidized Americans to the tune of nearly $3 billion to buy a new car and destroy an old one? Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood declared in August that, "This is the one stimulus program that seems to be working better than just about any other program."
One of Washington's all-time dumb ideas.
If that's true, heaven help the other programs. Last week U.S. automakers reported that new car sales for September, the first month since the clunker program expired, sank by 25% from a year earlier. Sales at GM and Chrysler fell by 45% and 42%, respectively. Ford was down about 5%. Some 700,000 cars were sold in the summer under the program as buyers received up to $4,500 to buy a new car they would probably have purchased anyway, so all the program seems to have done is steal those sales from the future. Exactly as critics predicted.
Cash for clunkers had two objectives: help the environment by increasing fuel efficiency, and boost car sales to help Detroit and the economy. It achieved neither. According to Hudson Institute economist Irwin Stelzer, at best "the reduction in gasoline consumption will cut our oil consumption by 0.2 percent per year, or less than a single day's gasoline use." Burton Abrams and George Parsons of the University of Delaware added up the total benefits from reduced gas consumption, environmental improvements and the benefit to car buyers and companies, minus the overall cost of cash for clunkers, and found a net cost of roughly $2,000 per vehicle. Rather than stimulating the economy, the program made the nation as a whole $1.4 billion poorer.
The basic fallacy of cash for clunkers is that you can somehow create wealth by destroying existing assets that are still productive, in this case cars that still work. Under the program, auto dealers were required to destroy the car engines of trade-ins with a sodium silicate solution, then smash them and send them to the junk yard. As the journalist Henry Hazlitt wrote in his classic, "Economics in One Lesson," you can't raise living standards by breaking windows so some people can get jobs repairing them.
In the category of all-time dumb ideas, cash for clunkers rivals the New Deal brainstorm to slaughter pigs to raise pork prices. The people who really belong in the junk yard are the wizards in Washington who peddled this economic malarkey.
NEWS SOURCE
Remember "cash for clunkers," the program that subsidized Americans to the tune of nearly $3 billion to buy a new car and destroy an old one? Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood declared in August that, "This is the one stimulus program that seems to be working better than just about any other program."
One of Washington's all-time dumb ideas.
If that's true, heaven help the other programs. Last week U.S. automakers reported that new car sales for September, the first month since the clunker program expired, sank by 25% from a year earlier. Sales at GM and Chrysler fell by 45% and 42%, respectively. Ford was down about 5%. Some 700,000 cars were sold in the summer under the program as buyers received up to $4,500 to buy a new car they would probably have purchased anyway, so all the program seems to have done is steal those sales from the future. Exactly as critics predicted.
Cash for clunkers had two objectives: help the environment by increasing fuel efficiency, and boost car sales to help Detroit and the economy. It achieved neither. According to Hudson Institute economist Irwin Stelzer, at best "the reduction in gasoline consumption will cut our oil consumption by 0.2 percent per year, or less than a single day's gasoline use." Burton Abrams and George Parsons of the University of Delaware added up the total benefits from reduced gas consumption, environmental improvements and the benefit to car buyers and companies, minus the overall cost of cash for clunkers, and found a net cost of roughly $2,000 per vehicle. Rather than stimulating the economy, the program made the nation as a whole $1.4 billion poorer.
The basic fallacy of cash for clunkers is that you can somehow create wealth by destroying existing assets that are still productive, in this case cars that still work. Under the program, auto dealers were required to destroy the car engines of trade-ins with a sodium silicate solution, then smash them and send them to the junk yard. As the journalist Henry Hazlitt wrote in his classic, "Economics in One Lesson," you can't raise living standards by breaking windows so some people can get jobs repairing them.
In the category of all-time dumb ideas, cash for clunkers rivals the New Deal brainstorm to slaughter pigs to raise pork prices. The people who really belong in the junk yard are the wizards in Washington who peddled this economic malarkey.
NEWS SOURCE
Council relaxes ban on clunkers
Ogdensburg to allow one unlicensed vehicle on property if covered
By MAX R. MITCHELL (TIMES STAFF WRITER)
OGDENSBURG — Storing an unlicensed car on your property no longer will be a problem for city residents, but some city officials are worried they won't be able to keep junk cars off of people's lawns.
The City Council voted 5-2 on Monday to replace a three-year-old ban on storing unlicensed cars with a zoning ordinance allowing people to store one unlicensed vehicle on their property as long as it is covered.
Mayor William D. Nelson and Councilor Nicholas J. Vaugh voted against the changes.
"I've objected to it on the grounds that I don't have a way of knowing what's under the tarp," City Manager Arthur J. Sciorra said. "This could end up an opportunity to put a tarp over junk."
According to Code Enforcement Officer Gregg A. Mallette, his department deals with unlicensed vehicles on a weekly basis. With the changes, inspectors will start making more determinations about what is allowable and what is considered junk.
"It's really a discretionary call on the inspectors' part, but we're in the city every day and we try to keep an eye on this property maintenance issue," he said. "There are certain properties we know that are always going to be problematic."
While the new law may create a problem for enforcement, according to Councilor Michael D. Morley, the old law was unfair to the people of Ogdensburg.
"A lot of people wanted this," he said. "If your son goes off to college and he can't take his car, are you going to keep it registered all that time, or sell it because you can't use it the first year? There are the little things in life that laws kind of screw up when you have them one way."
He said the new law is strict enough to be enforceable and will not lead the city to become a junkyard.
"A lot of people cover up their cars now and it's a registered car," he said. "It's no different than any other law."
Mr. Vaugh said that along with enforcement concerns, he is afraid the changes will put the city back several years in its efforts to improve its image.
"We constantly see the push to clean up the city," he said. "This harms those efforts to clean and beautify the city for the current and future residents and visitors."
For Mr. Mallette, concerns about junk cars in the city are nothing new.
"It's an ordinance we've always dealt with. It's a constant thing to try to keep them down to a minimum," he said.
NEWS SOURCE
By MAX R. MITCHELL (TIMES STAFF WRITER)
OGDENSBURG — Storing an unlicensed car on your property no longer will be a problem for city residents, but some city officials are worried they won't be able to keep junk cars off of people's lawns.
The City Council voted 5-2 on Monday to replace a three-year-old ban on storing unlicensed cars with a zoning ordinance allowing people to store one unlicensed vehicle on their property as long as it is covered.
Mayor William D. Nelson and Councilor Nicholas J. Vaugh voted against the changes.
"I've objected to it on the grounds that I don't have a way of knowing what's under the tarp," City Manager Arthur J. Sciorra said. "This could end up an opportunity to put a tarp over junk."
According to Code Enforcement Officer Gregg A. Mallette, his department deals with unlicensed vehicles on a weekly basis. With the changes, inspectors will start making more determinations about what is allowable and what is considered junk.
"It's really a discretionary call on the inspectors' part, but we're in the city every day and we try to keep an eye on this property maintenance issue," he said. "There are certain properties we know that are always going to be problematic."
While the new law may create a problem for enforcement, according to Councilor Michael D. Morley, the old law was unfair to the people of Ogdensburg.
"A lot of people wanted this," he said. "If your son goes off to college and he can't take his car, are you going to keep it registered all that time, or sell it because you can't use it the first year? There are the little things in life that laws kind of screw up when you have them one way."
He said the new law is strict enough to be enforceable and will not lead the city to become a junkyard.
"A lot of people cover up their cars now and it's a registered car," he said. "It's no different than any other law."
Mr. Vaugh said that along with enforcement concerns, he is afraid the changes will put the city back several years in its efforts to improve its image.
"We constantly see the push to clean up the city," he said. "This harms those efforts to clean and beautify the city for the current and future residents and visitors."
For Mr. Mallette, concerns about junk cars in the city are nothing new.
"It's an ordinance we've always dealt with. It's a constant thing to try to keep them down to a minimum," he said.
NEWS SOURCE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
