This is an appeal from an Order to Demolish of a mobile home structure located at 6812 Garden Drive.  The initial order was based on the Building Official's determination that the onsite structure(s) met the criteria for demolition as set forth in Section 6-185 – Criteria for Demolition of the City’s Code of Ordinances.  City Council shall hear and consider all facts material to the appeal and may affirm, modify or reverse the Order to Demolish.  The matter shall be handled as a quasi-judicial proceeding.

The subject property is 0.17 acre located on the northeast corner of Garden Drive and Snug Harbor Road, and lies in the Special Flood Hazard Area AE with a base flood elevation of 10.  The City of New Port Richey participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NIFP), and for this reason Substantial Improvement must comply with the 50% rule.  Without the submittal of a certified estimate from a licensed appraiser, the City looks to current documented information from the Pasco County Property Appraiser’s office.  The site contains a mobile home built in the 1950s (unable to locate data plate) with approximately 750 square feet of living area. 

As a matter for the record, please be advised that on August 19, 2021, the structure was inspected by the City's Building Official. The Building Official determined at that time that the structure met the criteria for demolition as outlined in the City’s Code of Ordinances. As a result, on September 8, 2021, the owner was notified by certified mail of the Order to Demolish, and given 30 days to appeal.  The Notice stated that the owner may, within 60 days of date of Notice, demolish and clear the site by hiring a contractor of choice.  Also on this date, the property was posted, the Notice was recorded in Pasco County Public Records, and the Notice was published in the Tampa Bay Times on September 8th and 15^th.

The City’s Code of Ordinances states that the Building Official must find the existence of one or more of seven possible criteria. The Order to Demolish was issued based on the existence of the following four criteria:

• Section 6-185(2) – The structure is so unsanitary or so utterly fails to provide the amenities essential to decent living that it is manifestly unfit for human habitation, or is likely to cause sickness or disease, so as to work injury to the life, health or safety on the general public or occupant.  “Amenities essential to decent living” include, but are not limited to, the availability of potable water, at least one (1) working toilet, and protection from exposure to the elements.
• Section 6-185(3) - The structure, or a portion thereof, as a result of decay, deterioration, or dilapidation is likely to fully or partially collapse.
• Section 6-185(6) - There is a serious and substantial falling away, hanging loose, or loosening of the siding, block, brick, or other building material creating a hazard for occupants or the public.
• Section 6-185(7) - The structural parts have become so dilapidated, decayed, or deteriorated, or there is an unusual sagging or leaning out of plumb of the building or any part thereof caused by deterioration or over-stressing of the structure of structural parts, that the structure is manifestly unsafe.

Under Section 6-190 of the City’s Code of Ordinances, the owner or any interested party may appeal an Order to Demolish.  On October 7, 2021, Mr. Ronald Howarth, property owner, submitted an appeal package along with the requisite $500.00 filing fee.   

• That the structure does not meet the criteria for demolition set out in, Section 6-185,
• That the structure cannot be demolished within the time specified by the order, or
• That the structure can be reconstructed, repaired, or restored.
  
  

If a petitioner is appealing based on this sub-section, the petitioner must submit, along with the written petition for appeal, the following documentation regarding the proposed reconstruction, repair or restoration:

a) list of proposed work to the structure;

b) estimated cost;

c) timetable for obtaining permits; and

d) timetable for completion of  the  work 

As you can see from the list above, the applicant is required to provide a list of proposed work to the structure as part of the appeal process.  Mr. Howarth failed to provide a work plan and instead provided a proposed materials list.  Therefore in specific regard to the appeal, it is insufficient as it does not provide the appropriate data by which to gauge the true cost of a responsible manner of repair (i.e. – contractor estimate.)

Additionally, City Council should be aware of the fact that based on the numbers provided by Mr. Howarth for the necessary labor and materials, the substantial improvement calculation does not support the refurbishment of the structure.

Substantial Improvement (S/I) Calculation:

• Assessed building value per Pasco County Property Appraiser:  $6,641,
• Building value divided by fifty percent (50%) for S/I:  $3,320.50,
• The appeal application was submitted with a construction value based on Mr. Howarth’s estimates for renovations, totaling $5,150,
• Subtracting the permit fee of $450 and the engineering and elevation drawings of $1,000 (not included in calculation for S/I) leaves a renovation cost of $3,700 (labor $2,404 and materials $1,296),
• Calculation for S/I:  56%