Entries Tagged 'Code Enforcement' ↓

On the Sioux Falls City Council agenda, Item#2 for Tuesday’s meeting has more details on what disqualifies bidders. Here is the full Doc; BID-Dis

I highlighted the items that ‘could’ apply to Legacy and Hultgren;

The city announced this today;

The City said because of Falls Park’s popularity, a loss control consultant contracted by the South Dakota Public Assurance Alliance (SDPAA) evaluates the park with a risk manager annually.

These reports, which were done orally, were completed in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2014, 2015, and 2017.

I called Central Services Director Sue QuanBeckBabbaling and asked why NO one with the city’s risk department, fire department, police department or parks department didn’t take notes during these ‘ORAL’ reviews.

She replied, “I know, kind of embarrassing isn’t it? To tell you the truth, the city just forgets to budget for pens and notepads each year for staff. That is why this year we are offering a solution by having a bake sale at city hall to fund these necessary office items.”

I wondered with all the other ‘expensive’ things the city spends it’s budget on, how such a oversight could happen. Tracy Turncoat the city’s finance director said this,

“Well, I thought we had the budget shortfall handled once we implemented the rule that city employees must bring their own bathroom tissue to work and making it SOP for SFPD officers to do their duty at McDonalds. But it just couldn’t shore up the shortfall enough.”

He did however tell me that they will see some cost savings once the notepads can be donated, “We will be spending less on chalk in the engineering department.”

Just when you think your city is doing fine financially, the little things rear their heads.

The sale will occur this Friday from 9 AM-4 PM, and for an extra dollar per cupcake the mayor will personally lick the frosting off the top.*

*Sorry, no refunds if you have a gag reflex.

There was some interesting things that came out of Angela’s story;

The City’s own definition of a junkyard: includes any land used for the “storage, wrecking, dismantling, salvage, collection, processing, purchase, sale or exchange of abandoned and discarded vehicles.”

Junkyard Definition according to Sioux Falls City Ordinance:      

JUNKYARD: Any lot, land, parcel, or portion thereof used for the storage, wrecking, dismantling, salvage, collection, processing, purchase, sale, or exchange of abandoned or discarded vehicles, goods, waste, and scrap materials including but not limited to two or more abandoned or inoperable motor vehicles, glass, tires, appliances, machinery or automotive and mechanical parts. A JUNKYARD does not include operations entirely enclosed within buildings.

If it walks like a duck . . .

However in 2012, Circuit Court Judge Stuart Tiede ruled that IAA did operate as a junkyard when the owner wanted to add a location near Crooks. Tiede overturned a Minnehaha County Commission decision to allow a permit for the operation as something “other” than a junkyard.

Tiede wrote in his decision: “The wrecking or dismantling of motor vehicles is not required in order for the use to a salvage or junk yard.”

Imagine that, another judge disagreeing with local government.

Angela Kennecke: Is the City taking regular inventory reports?
Tobias: No, At this point in time we’re not and what I can say from our perspective is that there are no violations on site at this time.

Uh, wrong answer. If you are NOT taking inventory how do you know there isn’t any violations? Funny how code enforcement in this city, using snow gates and planning and zoning depends on who you are NOT what you are. It’s a poor neighborhood so who cares about the rats and junk. Maybe they can put up another Bishop Dudley House up there.

Here we go again, except this time, fortunately no one died.

The city building department was warned several times about a possible wall collapse, and ignored it;

In a string of emails between her and Warrington, Roti expressed her concerns, repeatedly asking whether a structural engineer had looked at the wall.

Warrington assured Roti and several others included on the email — multiple times over two months — that the situation was being handled appropriately.

One thing I have heard from a lot of contractors and citizens during this latest campaign season is that the city employees need to get better at customer service. Whether that is police, fire, code enforcement or building services.

The next mayor needs to support a renewed agenda of bringing customer service back to city hall, before more people die or get hurt.

A great view, of a nightclub roof.

After several citizens showed up last week to ask the city to AT LEAST do a study of decibel levels downtown, it seems not much is happening, except more complaints.

Common sense would tell you if you have mixed use with commercial (a nightclub) next to residential, the one producing more decibels would get precedent, NOPE. The quieter use is used instead of a fair balance between the two uses.

As we all know, ambient noise downtown alone is probably between 58-60 decibels. Wouldn’t a study by the PD and Health Department using the ‘L’ scale be worth it? The scale takes a 10 minute reading of the lows and highs of decibels and gives a 90% average reading. Makes sense.

I think 10-20 locations should be picked downtown to do the reading, and each location should take readings every 2-4 hours, Monday-Sunday. Once those readings come in, we could figure out an average at those different times for downtown.

I think the city just ‘telling us’ what is acceptable is unacceptable until we really know what is reality. Maybe 55 is a good place to be, but until we know what the averages are, we don’t know where the starting point is.

I also think some building codes and zoning needs to be changed for residential units. Even if we didn’t have a nightclub next door to a residential unit – traffic, trains, airplanes, etc., are probably louder than what current code is.

Let’s face it, if we are going to continue to develop housing downtown and other development like hotels and commercial we are going to have to come to grips with the fact we have turned downtown into a bustling entertainment district. We MUST make changes NOW while we are still growing, otherwise we are going to have a code enforcement nightmare down the road as downtown gets more dense.

I got a reminder this weekend from a fellow city hall watcher that the city already had a discussion about noise ordinances . . . 10 years ago! I remember the discussion, it involved outdoor music at Stogeez and the time that music needs to stop.

Well, my response is that we need to revisit the topic, especially with the enormous growth of downtown over the past 10 years. I don’t think it is unreasonable to maintain a 70 decibel level during the day and 65 at night. Even without entertainment facilities downtown, the ambient noise downtown during the day hovers in that 68-70 area.

I can’t wait to hear the city’s argument on this;

One important fact the public should understand is that all of downtown is zoned to allow residential uses. The zoning for downtown also allows for commercial, retail, and a mix of other uses, which creates the unique atmosphere we all expect from a downtown environment. No changes have been made to zoning or the noise ordinance as a result of any new residential units in downtown.

If that is the case, how is a downtown nightclub able to operate for 6 years with NO intervention until residential units are built next door with an easement to hang patios over the roof of the nightclub?

It is no surprise to me that the city will fight any changes. Why? The building department once again screwed up and authorized something that should have NOT been authorized without a thorough discussion with the neighbors.

It’s pretty clear what this property owner thinks when code enforcement asked this Fargo owned company to come in compliance on a sign that wasn’t being used. They complied. Be careful what you ask for I guess. Just don’t paint pregnant women on the sign, than you really could get in trouble. LMFAO.

Hey, I see it right here on my blog, several anonymous commenters throwing barbs at each other, because it is protected speech, and better yet, no one knows who is saying it. We seem to be a lot more daring in how we treat people when we can get away with it without being identified. Sad really;

Is there really a need to demand action from the city or call the police every time we’re annoyed at a neighbor’s too-long grass or the landmine their Chihuahua left beside our mailbox?

Approach minor nuisances of daily existence on your street with a Neighborhood Watch philosophy that promotes autonomy and self-reliance. There will always be occasional extremes — like the toxic situation seen recently in Norton Acres — but a great deal can be handled on a neighbor-to-neighbor basis without appealing to authorities. Good fences might make good neighbors, but only if we’re willing to walk through the gate for mediation and understanding when needed.

In other words if we just chose to talk with each other instead of anonymously turning each other in, things would be a lot better off, and frankly cheaper.